Leadership Theories

Visit my blog at http://leadershiptheories.blogspot.com/ for more content.

The following material is a high level summary of twelve approaches/theories in leadership. Each section
covers a theory/approach to leadership. The sections cover the basic assumptions, references, diagrams,
leadership instruments, strengths and weaknesses. This summary is based on my readings from a
diversity of books and experience with leadership. Two books in particular, I have found to be
indispensable and are a must read.

Leadership Theory and Practice, Peter G. Northouse, Third Edition.
Management of Organizational Behavior, Paul Hersey, Seventh Edition

On Leadership
In perusing these materials, I did not find a simple answer or recipe for leadership. As suspected,
leadership is a part of all us at home, in our business, and our community. What was extremely
beneficial to me was that reading through the various theories, and case studies, I was able to identify
with many of these examples and situations. It had enriched me with an insight about myself and those I
interact with. Frequently, after reading a paragraph, I would relate a particular situation or method to a
behavior that I or someone I know was engaged in.

It is that very awareness of both my personal and other people's behaviors that makes leadership
possible. I am the first to admit that learning about all these approaches to leadership does not
automatically make one a good leader, but they give a tremendous insight and the possibility to become
a better one.

My own view is that "Leadership is a process to change or create something from what otherwise would
be chaos. It must be highly flexible and demands awareness, skills, and sensitivity. It is highly dependent
on situations. Leadership is being human." In my view, the combination of the majority of these
approaches and theories is the true leadership theory. They are all equally eye opening for everyone in
an organization.

Management vs. Leadership
There are of course distinctions between the concepts of Management and Leadership. This is however
another in depth discussion. For the sake of this summary, they will both be synonymous in the
upcoming sections with the exception of the snippet below.

The classical description of management work comes from Drucker (1973). He has defined five basic
functions of a management job. They are planning, organizing, controlling, motivating and coordinating.
This is the basis for many later role definitions.

Leaders have different roles to accomplish. Maybe the best known definition comes from Bennis
between a leader and a manager. In his classic On becoming a leader (1989, 44-45) he has written
about the differences of leaders and managers as follows:



- The manager administers; the leader innovates.
- The manager is a copy; the leader is an original.
- The manager maintains; the leader develops.
- The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people.
- The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.
- The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.
- The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.
- The manager has eye always on the bottom line; the leader has his eye on the horizon.
- The manager imitates; the leader originates.
- The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.
- The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his own person.
- The manager does things right; the leader does the right things.

Leadership definitions
It is clear that leadership can be defined in many different ways and there are more subjective ways of
defining it than objective ones. As you read about theories and research on leadership in later sections,
you will recognize that the theorists and researchers each had his/her own definitions of leadership, and
that they focus on somewhat different aspects of the job requirements of a leader. An example of a
theory that is not covered in the upcoming sections, but is worth noting is the decision tree approach.

The decision tree approach presented by Victor Vroom is focused entirely on whether leader chooses to
make a decision on his/her own or if the group should be involved in the decision. In this approach, you
ask a series of yes/no questions and based on the response to each to each branch, the decision tree
takes you to the next question or to a final decision.

The questions of the decision tree involve whether the leader has the information necessary to make
the decision, whether the decision has quality requirements, whether the followers have the
information necessary, whether they are likely to accept the decision if the leader makes it alone, and so
forth. The process is designed to help the leader make or delegate the decision.

This approach clearly focuses on one aspect of leadership (decision making) this is an example of a
contingency theory of leadership

One distinction to keep in mind while reading the material is the difference between emergent and
assigned leadership. Many of the approaches and theories set forth deal with emergent leadership and
few of them talk about the assigned leadership roles.

The self-monitoring scale
The self-monitoring scale was designed to measure the extent to which a person is sensitive to the
expectations of others in a social situation. It also measures the extent to which the person is able to
shape his or her behavior to match those expectations. Both the males and females received varying
scores on the self-monitoring scale, but only the females' scores were related to the number of
leadership nominations they received. The explanation that Gary Odous came up with goes as follows:
The female students were a distinct minority in the class. Each study group had one or two females
among the seven or eight students making up the group. The class is offered in the college of business,
where the majority of the students are male. As a result, we might assume that the subject matter of
the class--and indeed the class itself--might be considered a masculine-oriented activity. For a female


member of the study group to emerge as a leader, she had to recognize the masculine demands of the
situation and conform her behavior to those demands. The women who had high self-monitoring scores
were better able to do this than those with low self-monitoring scores.
The Trait Approach

First systematic ways to study leadership in the 20th century. Focused on what made people "great
leaders". Identified innate characteristics for the "Great Man" theories such as Lincoln, Gandhi, etc.
Research focused on determining the traits that people are born with (Bass, 1990; Jago, 1982)

During the Mid-20th century, the theory was challenged (Stogdill, 1948) that "no consistent set of traits
differentiated leaders from non-leaders." An individual who was a leader in one situation might not have
been a leader in another situation. It was re-conceptualized as a relationship between people as
opposed to a set of traits (Stogdill, 1948).

The trait approach emphasizes the personality of the leader.
In recent years, there has been a renewed interest. Bryman, 1992; Lord DeVader and Alliger 1986
found that personality traits were strongly associated with individuals perceptions of leadership.
Locke and Kirkpatrick 1991, claimed that effective leaders are actually distinct types of people in
several key respects.
It started with a focus on the traits, shifted to focus on situations, then shifted back to traits.
A good overview was found in 2 surveys
o Stogdill, 1948 survey: Analyzed 124 traits. An individual does not become a leader solely
based on possessing these traits. The traits must be relevant to the situation in which the
leader is functioning. The survey argued that leadership was determined by the situational
factor.
The following differentiated a leader from other individuals.
Intelligence
Alertness
Insight
Responsibility
Initiative
Persistence
Self confidence
Sociability
o Stogdill, 1974 survey: Analyzed 163 traits. This survey was more balanced and argued that
that both Personality and Situational factors were equal determinants of leadership.
The following differentiated a leader from other individuals.
Drive for responsibility and task completion.
Vigor and persistent pursuit of goals.
Willingness to adventure and originality in problem solving.
Drive to exercise initiative in social situations.
Self-confidence and sense of personal identity.
Willingness to accept consequences of decision and action.
Readiness to absorb interpersonal stress.
Willingness to tolerate frustration and delay.
Ability to influence other persons' behavior
Capacity to structure social interactions systems to the purpose oat hand.


Mann, 1959 conducted similar study which examined 1400 traits. He identified leaders as having
strength in the following: Intelligence, Masculinity, Adjustment, Dominance, Extroversion, and
conservatism.
Lord et al, 1986 reassessed Mann findings and used the meta-analysis procedure.
Locke and Kirkpatrick, 1991 contended that "Leaders are not like other people". They postulated
that leaders differ from non-leaders in 6 traits including: Drive, desire to lead, honesty, integrity,
self-confidence, cognitive ability, and knowledge of the business.
The trait approach and a century of research gives the would-be leaders a set of traits that they
can develop.

Stogdill (1948) Mann (1959) Stogdill (1974) Lord, DeVader and
Allinger (1986)
Kirkpatrick and
Locke (1991)
Intelligence
Alertness
Responsibility
Initiative
Persistence
Self-confidence
Sociability
Intelligence
Masculinity
Adjustment
Dominance
Extroversion
Conservatism
Achievement
Persistence
Insight
Initiative
Self-confidence
Responsibility
Cooperativeness
Tolerance
Influence
Sociability
Intelligence
Masculinity
Dominance
Drive
Motivation
Integrity
Confidence
Cognitive ability
Task knowledge

The traits that are central to this list are:
o Intelligence
Strong verbal ability, perceptual ability, and reasoning. Research indicates that a
leader's intellectual ability should not vary too much from that of his subordinates. In
cases where there is a significant difference, it can be counterproductive.
o Self confidence
Ability to be certain about one's competencies and skills. It includes self-esteem, self-
assurance and belief that one can make a difference. This is very important for ability
to influence others.
o Determination
Desire to get the job done. It includes initiative, persistence, dominance, and drive.
Leaders exhibiting this are proactive, and have the capacity to persevere against
obstacles.
o Integrity
Honesty and trustworthiness. Adhere to a strong set of principles and take
responsibility for their actions. Leaders with integrity inspire confidence in others.
They do what they say there are going to do. They are dependable, loyal, and not
deceptive.
o Sociability
This is leader's inclination to seek out pleasant social relationships. Friendly, outgoing,
courteous, tactful, and diplomatic. They are sensitive to others' needs, show concern,
and wellbeing.

How does the trait approach work?


The trait approach focuses exclusively on the leader and not the followers. It suggests that
organizations will work better if people in managerial positions have designated leadership
profiles. Selecting the "right" people will increase organizational effectiveness. It is used for
personal awareness and development. When manager analyze their traits, they gain insight into
their strengths and weaknesses. It allows leaders to get an understanding and take corrective
actions.

Strengths
o It is intuitively appealing
o It has a century of research to back it up
o By focusing exclusively on leader it has been able to provide some deeper understanding on
how Leaders personality is related to leadership process
o It has given some benchmarks for what we need to look for, if we want to be leaders.

Weakness
o The failure to delimit a definitive list of leadership traits
o It has failed to take situations into account
o The approach has resulted in highly subjective determinations of the "most important"
leadership traits
o It can also be criticized for failing to look at traits in relationship to leadership outcomes
o It is not a useful approach for training and development of leadership. (The reasoning here
is that traits are relatively fixed psychological structures that limits the value of training. On
the contrary, we could challenge this assumption concerning at least some traits
changeable.)

Leadership Instrument
There are many instruments that are used by organizations. Common personality tests include
Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory or the Myers-Briggs Type indicator. The leadership
Trait Questionnaire (LTQ) assesses the personal leadership characteristics.






The Skills Approach
o The skills approach emphasizes the capabilities of the leader.
o The advantage of this approach is anyone can become an effective leader.
o Similar to the trait approach, the skills approach takes a leader-centered approach except that it
focuses on the skills and abilities instead of the "Personality" traits which are usually innate.
o The original research came from the "Skills of an effective administrator" Harvard Business Review
published in 1955 by Robert Katz.
o A multitude of researched was done in the 1990's by Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs &
Fleishman.
o Katz identified 3 basic skills based on his observation of executives in the workplace. Katz
emphasized that the skills tell "What leaders can accomplish" as opposed to trait which
emphasized "Who leaders are". The skills approach theorizes that leaders can be developed and
trained.
Technical
Having knowledge and being proficient in a specific type of work or activity.
Technical skills is not important at lower levels of management and less important at
higher levels.
Ability to work with things.
Human
Ability to work with people.
Being aware of one's own perspective on issues and at the same time being aware of
others perspectives.
Leaders adapt their own ideas with those of others.ility Model"
Create an atmosphere of trust where employees can feel comfortable, secure,
encouraged to be involved in planning the things that affect them.
Conceptual
Ability to work with ideas and concepts.
Works easily with abstractions and hypothetical situations.
Creating visions, strategic plans.
Is most important at top management levels.





What are Schemas?
Northouse presents the concept of the schema, but he does not explain it very completely.
Cognitive theorists have constructed the concept of a schema to help explain how we think, learn,
remember, and experience the world. A schema is essentially a network of ideas surrounding a
specific concept. Such concepts could include mothers, fathers, bosses, African Americans,
Hispanics, and even yourself. Schemata (the plural of schema) function in a way that organizes our
experiences and allows our information processing to be efficient. Their affect can be good or bad,
depending on the circumstances.

For example, suppose you meet a new person at work. The person is African American. Because of
your schema about African American persons you probably assume that you already know some
things about this person. You might, depending on the nature of your schema, assume that he or
she has rhythm, or basketball-playing skills, or other characteristics you associate with the concept
African American. You may learn some things about this person that are not congruent with your
existing schema. You may ignore them, forget them or classify this person as a special exception to
the concept. All of these will contribute to maintaining the existing schema.

People have a natural tendency to resist changing our schemata on the basis of new information.
For example, people who are highly prejudiced against African Americans are likely to be very
resistant to change in that schema. Although a good leader will have a large number of schemata
about different people, his or her schemata are more likely to be flexible and receptive to new
information.

o Skills Model - Mumford and colleges identified a new skills based model of organizational
leadership.
Started in the early 199s with funding from the DOD. Focused on 1800 army officers
representing 6 grades levels.
They attempted to explain "Effective Performance".
They used a "Capability Model" to explain the relationship between a leader's skills and
knowledge.
The skills model does NOT focus on "what leaders do", but on the capabilities.
It is composed of 5 different components
Competencies
Individual attributes
Leadership outcomes
Career experiences
Environmental influences






Competencies
Problem solving skills
Ability to solve new, unusual, and ill-defined problems. It includes gathering problem
information; formulate new understandings, and generating prototypes plans for
solutions. These skills do not work in a vacuum, but in the organizational context.
Leaders must understand their capacities within the organization.
An example is being the director of Human Resources for a medium sized company
trying to develop a plan to reduce the costs of healthcare costs.
First - identify full ramifications for employees changing benefits.
Second - gather information about how benefits can be scaled back.
Third - Find a way to teach and inform employees about the change.
Fourth - Create scenarios for how the changes can be instituted.
Fifth - Look closely at the solution itself. How will this change affect company's
mission? Careers?
Last - Are there issues in the organization that infringe on the implementation of
these changes?
Social Judgment skills
Capacity to understand people and social systems.
Working with others to solve problems and marshal support to implement changes.
Similar to Katz' views, but delineated into the following:
Perspective taking
Understand the attitudes others have towards a particular problem.
This is empathy applied to the problem solving. Being sensitive to other
people perspective and goals.
Another tem for this is "Social Intelligence"
Social Perceptiveness
Having insight into how others within the organization function.
What is important to others? What motivates them?
A leader with these skills has a keen sense of how employees will respond
to any proposed change.
Reacting to others with flexibility. This is the ability to change one's
behavior in light of an understanding of others perspectives in the
organization.
Being open and non-dogmatic
Social Performance
Includes a wide set of skills.
Leaders should effectively be able to communicate their own vision to
others.
Skills of persuasion are essential.
Function as mediators.
Knowledge
Refers to the accumulation of knowledge and the mental structures used to organize
information. This is called Schema (summary, diagrammatic representation or outline)
Organized information (schemata) become more meaningful than the bits that
comprises it.


Knowledgeable people are called "experts" and can process complex information of
the intricacies of a particular field.

Individual attributes
General cognitive ability
Simply said, this is a person's intelligence (fluid intelligence) which includes perceptual
processing, information processing, general reasoning, creative and divergent thinking
capabilities, and memory skills.
This is linked to Biology and not to experience.
Crystallized cognitive ability
Learned and acquired intellectual ability through experience.
Grows continuously and does not fall off win adulthood.
Motivation
Model suggests three types of motivation.
a. Leaders must be willing and motivated to tackle complex organizational
problems. A person must be willing to lead.
b. Leaders must be willing to express dominance.
c. Leaders must be committed to the social good of the organization.
Personality
A wide range of traits that can influence leadership such as Openness, tolerance for
ambiguity, and curiosity.
Skills model theorizes that a leaders' personality characteristics helps people cope
with complex organizational situations.
Leadership outcomes
These outcomes are strongly influenced by leader's competencies. When leaders exhibit these
competencies, they increase the chance of problem solving and overall performance.
Effective Problem Solving
This is the keystone in the skills approach.
In voles creating solutions that are logical, effective, and unique.
Performance
This refers to how well a leader did their job.
Standards external criteria are used to measure good performance such as merit
increases, recognitions, etc.
Career experiences
Career experiences have an effect on a leader's ability to solve problems.
Research conducted by Mumford, Harding et al. in 2000 suggests that leaders can be
helped by
Challenging job assignments.
Mentoring.
Appropriate training.
Hands-on experience.
Career experiences can also positively affect an individual characteristics (enhance
intellectual capabilities or motivation)
Leaders learn and develop higher levels of conceptual capacity if the kinds of problems
they confront are progressively more complex.


According to this theory, leaders can develop and are not "born leaders"
Environmental Influences
Represent factors outside the leaders' competencies, characteristics, and experiences.
Examples include lacking technology, aging factory, subordinates skills, etc.

How does the skill approach work?
The skills approach is descriptive, describing leadership from a skills perspective. It provides structure for
effective leadership.

The 3 skills approach suggests the importance of certain leadership skills depending on where the leader
are in the hierarchy.

Mumford and colleagues provide a similar but more complex picture of skills needed for effective
leadership. The model contends that leadership outcomes are the direct results of a leader's
competencies in problem solving, social judgment, and knowledge. Each contain a large repertoire of
abilities. Environmental influences and career experiences play a direct or indirect role in leadership
performance.

The skills approach provides a map for how to reach effective leadership in organizations.

Strengths
It is a leader centric model that stresses on the development of some skills. It conceptualize and
creates a structure of the process.
It is intuitively appealing. It makes leadership available to everyone.
It incorporates an expansive view of leadership that incorporates a wide variety of components
such as problem solving, knowledge, social skills, etc.
It capture the intricacies involved in leadership because it has many variables.
Provides a structure that is consistent with the curricula of most leadership education programs.

Weakness
The breadths of the approach extend beyond the boundaries of the leadership (such as
motivation, personality, critical thinking, etc.) This makes it more general and less precise.
It has a weak predictive value. It does not explain how variations can affect performance.
It claims NOT to be a trait model, but major components of the model include trait-like attributes
like personality variables.
It may not be suitably or appropriately applied to other contexts. The model was constructed by
using a large sample from the military. Can it be generalized?

The approach is relatively new and has not been widely used in applied leadership settings. Despite the
lack of training on the skills approach, the scores allow individuals to lean about areas they can seek
training in.

Leadership Instrument


There are many questionnaires to assess individual's skills. They provide a useful self-help, but they are
not used in research because they have not been tested for reliability and validity. A typical
questionnaire is the "Skills Inventory".
Style Approach
The Style approach emphasizes the behavior of the leader. It focuses on what leaders do and how
they act. Researchers determined that there are two types of behaviors. The central purpose is to
explain how the leaders combine these two kinds of behavior to influence the subordinates to reach
a goal.
1. Task behavior: Facilitates goal accomplishment.
2. Relationship behavior: Help subordinates feel comfortable with themselves, with other
and with the situation.

There are many studies that have been conducted to investigate the style approach.
Some studies were conducted at Ohio State University in the 1940s based on Stogdill's findings.
Some studies were conducted at University of Michigan in the 1940s to understand how leadership
function in small groups.
Other research was conducted by Mouton and Blake in the early 1960s to understand how
managers used Task/Relationship in organizational settings.

The Ohio State University studies
The analytics were conducted by having a number of subordinates complete questionnaires
about their leaders and how many times they engaged in a certain type of behavior.
The original questionnaire (LBDQ) that was used had 1800 describing different behaviors.
A simplified form of 150 questions was given to hundreds of individuals in Military,
educational and industrial settings. It showed that certain behaviors were typical of leaders.
Stogdill published a shorthand version in 1963 called LBDQ-VXII
Researchers found that that there are 2 types of behaviors for leaders:
Initiating structure: This is essentially task behavior such as organizing work, giving
structure, defining roles, scheduling, etc.
Consideration structure: This is essentially relationship behaviors such as building
camaraderie, respect, trust, etc.
The studies showed that these 2 behaviors were distinct, independent, and on a different
continuum. A Leader can be high or low on either and the degree with which a leader
exhibited a certain behavior was not related to the other.
Other studies were conducted to determine which one makes a more effective form of
leadership. In some contexts, high consideration was found effective, in other contexts,
initiating structure was more effective. Other research showed that high on both was
optimum.

The University of Michigan studies
Focused on impact of leaders for small groups.
Identified 2 types of leadership behaviors:
Employee orientation: Describes leaders behavior who emphasizes the human side,
take an interest in individuals as human beings, individuality, and personal needs. This is
similar to "consideration behavior"


Production Orientation: Refers to the technical aspect of the job. Similar to "Initiating
Structure". Workers are means to get the job done.
Unlike the Ohio State research, this study conceptualized that the two behaviors were
opposite ends of the same continuum. This suggested that leaders who were oriented
towards one end were less oriented towards the other.
After additional studies, it was conceptualized that the two behaviors were independent of
each other similar to the Ohio State studies. (Kahn, 1956)
Additional studies were made during the 1950s and 60s trying to find a universal theory. The
results were contradictory and unclear (Yulk, 1994).
Some of this research pointed out that leaders who are high task and high relationship was
most effective. However, it was inconclusive.

Blake and Mouton Managerial/Leadership Grid
Appeared in 1960s and was revised many times in 1964, 78, 85, 91.
Used in consulting for organizational development throughout the world.
It has been used extensively in organizational training and development.
The Grid is trying to explain how managers/leaders in organizations are trying to reach their
purposes through concern for people and concern for production.
Concern for production: Achievements and tasks.
Concern for people: how a leader attends to people, HR, trust, relationships, etc.





Made up of two axis. Horizontal is leader's concern for results and vertical is leader's concern
for people. It has a 9 point scale. 1 represents the minimum. It portrays 5 major leadership
styles and two additional styles.
Authority-Compliance (9,1)
Heavy emphasis on task and job requirements.
Less emphasis on people except that people are tools to get the job done.
Subordinate communication is not emphasized except for the purpose of giving
instructions. Results driven.
The leader in this category is seen as controlling, demanding, hard-driving, and
over powering.
County Club Management (1,9)
Low concern for task accomplishment coupled with high concern for
interpersonal relationships.
The leaders try to create positive climate by being agreeable, eager to help,
confronting, and uncontroversial. They make sure people needs are met.
Impoverished Management (1,1)


Unconcerned with both task and relationships.
Acts uninvolved and withdrawn. Little contact with followers.
The leader maybe viewed as indifferent, noncommittal, resigned, and apathetic.
Middle of the road management (5,5)
Describes leaders who are compromisers.
Intermediate concern for both task and relationships.
A leader may be described as expedient, middle ground preference, soft pedals
disagreement, and swallows convictions in the interest of progress.
Team Management (9,9)
Strong emphasis on both task and relationships.
Promotes high degree of participation and team work.
A leader in this category can be viewed as stimulating participation, acting
determined gets issues into the open, makes priorities clear, follows through,
behaves open mindedly, and enjoys working.
Paternalism/Maternalism
Leaders who use (9,1) and (1,9), but does NOT integrate the two. This is the
benevolent dictator.
They act gracious for the purpose of goal accomplishment only.
They treat people as though they were disassociated with the task.
Opportunism
A leader who uses any combination of the basic five styles for the purpose of
personal advancement.
This leader usually has a dominant grid style and a backup style that they refer to
when under stress. Blake & Mouton (1985)





How does the style approach work?


It is not a refined theory that has organized set of prescriptions for effective leadership. It provides a
framework for assessing effective leadership. It work by describing to leaders the major
components of their behavior and NOT by telling them how to behave.

It reminds leaders that their actions towards others are both at the task and relationship
levels.
In some situations task behavior is more appropriate, in others relationship is more suitable.
Similarly, some subordinates need leaders who provide a lot of direction. Others need a lot of
support and nurturance.

The style approach can be easily applied in organizations. It provides a mirror for managers that
helps them understand, how they are performing as a manager. Leadership (Managerial) Grid has
been widely used in practice in the past. Today it is commonly seen as an old-fashioned approach by
management development professionals.

Strengths
It broadened the scope of leadership research to include the behaviors of leaders and what
they do in various situations
A wide range of studies on leadership style validates and gives credibility to the basic tenets
of this approach
The style approach has ascertained that a leaders style is composed of primarily two major
types of behavior: task and relationship
The style approach is heuristic: it provides us a broad conceptual map that is worth using in
our attempts to understand the complexity of leadership.
Weakness
The research on styles has not adequately shown, how leaders styles are associated
with performance outcomes (Bryman 1992; Yukl 1994)
It has failed to find a universal style of leadership that could be effective in almost
every situation
It implies that the most effective leadership style is the high task and high relationship
style (Blake and McCanse 1991) when the research findings provide only limited
support for a universal high-high style (Yukl 1994).

Leadership Instrument
Many instruments are available to assess the leader's style, but the two most commonly used ones
are LBDQ (Stogdill, 1963) and leadership Grid (Blake & McCanse, 1991). This is designed to be
completed by the observers. The leaders themselves complete the LOQ (Leader Opinion
Questionnaire).

Initially, as researchers analyzed the results of both surveys, they found that the initiating structure
scores and consideration scores were relatively independent of one another. However, when they
tested the questionnaires in further research, they discovered that only the LBDQ results seemed to
be predictive of work group outcomes. Apparently, leaders expressed opinions on the LOQ that
their subordinates did not observe or report on the LBDQ. As a result, only the LBDQ continued on
as a tool for leadership style research.



The Seven Managerial Grid Styles:
9,1 Controlling (Direct & dominant) I expect results and take control by clearly stating
a course of action. I enforce rules that sustain high
results and do not permit deviation.
1,9 Accommodating (Yield & Comply) I support results that establish and reinforce
harmony. I generate enthusiasm by focusing on
positive and pleasing aspects of work.
5,5 Status Quo (Balance & Compromise) I endorse results that are popular but caution
against taking unnecessary risk. I test my opinions
with others involved to assure ongoing
acceptability.
1,1 Indifferent (Evade & Elude) I distance myself from taking active responsibility
for results to avoid getting entangled in problems.
If forced, I take a passive or supportive position.
PAT Paternalistic (Prescribe & Guide) I provide leadership by defining initiatives for
myself and others. I offer praise and appreciation
for support, and discourage challenges to my
thinking.
OPP Opportunistic (Exploit & Manipulate) I persuade others to support results that offer me
private benefit. If they also benefit, thats even
better in gaining support. I rely on whatever
approach is needed to secure an advantage.
9,9 - Sound (Contribute & Commit) I initiate team action in a way that invites
involvement and commitment. I explore all facts
and alternative views to reach a shared
understanding of the best solution.

The Situational Approach
This is one of the most widely recognized and used approaches.
It was developed by Blanchard and Hersey in 1969
Based on Reddin's 3-D management style theory.
It was revised a number of times since inception, 1993, 1985, 1977, and 1988
It has been used extensively in organizations for training and development.
The basic premise is that different situations demand different kinds of leadership. A leader needs
to adapt his or her style to the situation.
It is composed of two dimensions:
Supportive dimension
Directive dimension
To assess what type of leadership is needed, a leader must evaluate the employees and assess
how competent and how committed they are to perform a given task.
Because employees skills and motivation vary over time, the theory suggests that leaders should
change the degree to which they are directive or supportive to meet those needs.
A leader must match their style to the competence and commitment of the subordinates.



Leadership styles
Directive Style: Assist group members accomplish a goal through giving directions, establishing
goals, setting timelines, schedules, defining roles. It is a one way communication.
Supportive style: Help group members feel comfortable about themselves, their co-workers, and
the situation. It involves two-way communication. Examples include asking for input, problem
solving, praising, and sharing information.

There are four distinct categories:
S1 -Directing - High Directive, Low Supportive
Leader focuses on goal achievement communication and less focus on support. Leader gives
instructions on how goals are to be achieved and supervises them carefully

S2 - Coaching - High Directive, High Supportive
Leader focuses on both goal achievement and supportive communication. Leader gives
instructions on how goals are to be achieved and supervises them carefully. Leader still
owns the final decisions.

S3 - Supporting - High supportive, Low Directive
Leader does not focus exclusively on goals, but uses supportive behavior that brings out the
employees skills around the task. The style includes listening, praising, asking for input, and
giving feedback. It gives the subordinate the decisions making on a day to day basis.
S4 - Delegating - Low supportive, Low Directive
The leader offers less task input and less social support. They facilitate employees
confidence and motivation. They lessen their involvement in planning, control of details,
and goal clarification. Subordinates take responsibility for getting the job done as they see
fit.







Development Levels
This is concerned with the development levels of subordinates. This is their degree of competence and
commitment to accomplishing a task. Employees are at the high development level if they possess the
skills and the confidence to get a task done. Alternatively, they are at a low development level if they
lack the skills, but possess the confidence to do a particular task.

On a particular task, an employee can be classified into 4 categories:
D1 or R1
Employees are new to a task or do not know how to do it, but they are excited about the
challenge in it.


D2 or R2
Employees have some competence, but low commitment.
D3 or R3
Employees who have moderate to high competence, but low commitment.
D4 or R4
Employees who have both a high competence and a high degree of commitment.

How does the situational approach work?
The approach is centered on the idea that employees move forward and backward along a development
continuum. For leaders to be effective, they need to diagnose where subordinates are on the continuum
and adapt their style to it. Leaders can begin by asking questions:
What is the task that needs to be accomplished?
How complicated is the task?
Are subordinates sufficiently skilled to do the task?
Do they have the desire to get the task done?

There is a 1-1 relationship between the Leader styles and the development levels. Because subordinates
move back and forth, it is imperative that leaders adjust their style. Subordinates may move between
levels either quickly or slowly.

The bell curve superimposed upon the larger box is the key to implementing the situational leadership
model. In this model, it is the situation, or the readiness and development level of the followers that
determines the appropriate leader style. By erecting a perpendicular line from any point on the
development or readiness scale, we can determine the appropriate amount of directive and supportive
behavior at the point where the line intersects the bell curve. If, for example, we were to draw a
perpendicular line directly up from the D1 label in the development box to the bell curve, it would
intersect the curve right about where the "C" in directing is located. From this position on the grid, we
see that the amount of directive behavior necessary is at about 80 percent of the maximum, while
supportive behavior is at about 35 percent of the maximum. If we follow the same procedure for the D2
point on the development scale, we will intersect the curve at a point just to the left of the initial C in
coaching. In this case, directive behavior needed is at about 60 percent of the maximum and the
supportive behavior needed is near the maximum at about 90 percent. At the D3 level, directive
behavior is still substantial at about 40 percent, while supportive behavior is at 90 percent. Finally, the
highest level of development, D4, requires only 25 percent supportive behavior and 25 percent directive
behavior. The curve demonstrates that as followers move from the lowest level of development toward
higher levels, the amount of supportive behavior that leaders should exhibit first increases at a fairly
dramatic rate and then begins to decrease at about the same rate. Directive behavior, on the other hand
should constantly decrease at a steady rate.

One of the strengths of the situational leadership model is that it makes the leader responsible for
helping followers move to higher developmental levels. But leaders must also be aware that their work
situation changes as followers move to higher developmental levels. In order to continue to be effective,
leaders must learn to modify their own behavior as the situation changes

The situational leadership model is widely used in training and development of leaders, because it is
easy to conceptualize and also easy to apply. The straightforward nature of situational leadership makes
it practical for managers to use. It is applicable in virtually any type of organization, at any level, for


almost all types of tasks, so there are a wide range of applications for it. From a practical point of view it
is perhaps the best leadership model so far. But it is also a product of its own time, 1960and 1970s, in
which leadership is perceived as being a one-to-one relationship.

Strengths
It is well known and frequently used; it has stood the test in the marketplace 400/500 fortune 500
companies
Intuitively simple.
It is very practical, but still based on sound theories
It is prescriptive: it tells you what to do and not to do in various contexts
It emphasizes the concept of leader flexibility
It reminds us to treat each subordinate differently based on the task at hand and to seek
opportunities to develop subordinates.

Weakness
There have been only a few research studies conducted to justify the basic assumptions behind
this approach. Does it really improve performance?
The concept of the subordinates readiness or development level is rather ambiguous
(Graeff 1997; Yukl 1998)
Also how the commitment is conceptualized is criticized (Graeff 1997)
The match of the leader style and the followers readiness level is also questioned. Two studies
conducted (300 high school teachers, University employees). Performance of mature teachers was
unrelated to the style exhibited by principles.
Does not address demographic variations.
Education, Experience, age, and gender.
Studies conducted by Vecchio & Boatwright in 2002 showed that levels of education were
inversely related to the directive style and not related to the supportive style.
Age was positively related to the desire for structure.
Female employees expressed desire for more supportive style.
It does not fully address the issue of one-to-one versus group leadership in an
organizational setting. Example: Would a 20 employees match their style to each individual or to
the overall development level of the group?
The leadership questionnaires that accompany the model have also been criticized. They are bias
because the answers have been predetermined.


Leadership Instrument
Many similar instruments are available. They provide 12-20 situations where the respo0ndants select
the preferred style.

In their work with leaders, Hersey and Blanchard have determined that most leaders have some
flexibility in the style of leadership they employ. To measure leadership style, Hersey and Blanchard
developed a tool they called LEAD. This tool has two parts. The first is called the LEAD self, in which the
leader himself responds to a variety of hypothetical situations. The second part, the LEAD other, asks co-
workers to describe the behavior of one of their colleagues. The two parts of the LEAD tool help to paint


a clear picture of a manager's leadership style. A leader may use different styles with different followers,
or he or she may have a main style and a backup style that comes into play when the main style doesn't
seem to be working. Still, other leaders seem only to have one main style. Hersey and Blanchard's
research focused on leaders who used two styles. By creating a style profile for a leader, trainers using
the situational leadership approach are able to pinpoint situations in which a leader may have some
difficulty and can prepare them to deal with those situations.

For example, a leader with an S1, S3 profile works with a high directive, low supportive style or a high
supportive, low directive style. Such a leader would have difficulty in working with a group of followers
where many are changing developmental levels by moving from D1 to D2. This leader might either
continue to use the now inappropriate S1 style, or move directly to the also inappropriate S3 style.

A leader with an S1, S4 profile seems to judge everything on competence. If workers don't have it and
S1, S4 leader will "ride" the followers and closely supervise their activities. Once a follower shows job
competence, the S1, S4 leader pulls back showing neither directive nor supportive behavior. An S2, S3
leader is able to vary the amount of directive behavior, but maintains a high level of supportive
behavior. An S1, S2 leader is able to vary the amount of supportive behavior shown, but maintains a
high level of directive behavior. An S2, S4 profile leader shows behavior which is either high in both
directive and supportive behavior or is low in both. Finally, an S3, S4 leader is characterized by never
showing a high level of directive behavior but varying his supportive behavior from high to low.

The Contingency Theory
o The theory is concerned with styles and situations.
o Many approaches can be called contingency, but the most widely recognized is Fiedler's in 1964,
1967. Fred Fiedler from University of Illinois developed it.
o This is a leader-match theory which tries to match the right leader for the situation.
o The approach was developed by studying the styles of many different leaders who worked in
different contexts, primarily military.
o Hundreds of leaders were analyzed who were good and bad.
o The LPC (Least Preferred coworker) was developed to measure the leaders styles. Leaders who
score high or Low are task motivated. The LPC is closely related to the "Semantic differential
scales" (The measurement of meaning, book).
o The LPC scale. Fiedler thought that how a leader feels about people he or she works with might
be a good indicator of whether he or she would be effective in dealing with them. In his earliest
work Fiedler actually used two scales. He asked his respondents to describe both his or her least
preferred coworker and his or her most preferred coworker. Fiedler then calculated the
difference between the evaluation of the most preferred coworker and that of the least preferred
coworker. He chose to call the resulting score the Assumed Similarity of Opposites (ASO) score.
Fiedler later discovered that there was very little variation in the way the most preferred
coworker was described by most people. On the other hand, the evaluations of least preferred
coworkers varied quite widely. As a result, the only thing that was contributing to the results was
the least preferred coworker score.

Leader Styles
Task motivated: concerned with reaching a goal
Relationship motivated: concerned with developing close relationships.



Situational variables
o Leader member relations
i. Group atmosphere and degree of confidence, loyalty and attraction that followers feel
about their leader.
o Task Structure
i. The degree to which the requirements of a task is clear and well defined.
ii. Well-structured tasks give more control to the leader.
iii. Vague and unclear tasks give less control and influence.
iv. A task is considered structured when
1. The requirements of the task are clearly stated and structured.
2. The path to accomplishing the task has few alternatives.
3. The completion of the task can be clearly demonstrated.
4. Limited number of correct solutions to the task exist.
v. An example of a structure task is "Cleaning the milk machine at McDonald's"
vi. An example of an unstructured tasks is to run a fund raiser for an organization.
o Position Power
i. The amount of authority a leader has to reward or punish employees.

The 3 situational factors determine the favorableness of the situations.
The most favorable situations are defined by having a good leader-follower relation, defined
tasks, and strong leader position power.
The least favorable situations are defined by having a poor leader-follower relation, unstructured
tasks, and weak leader position power.
The theory posits that certain styles be more effective in certain situations.
Task motivated individuals are more effective in Very favorable & very unfavorable
situations.
Relationship motivated individuals are more effective in moderately favorable situations.




How does the Contingency Theory work?
By measuring the LPC score and the three variables, one can predict whether a leader will be effective in
a particular situation. Once the nature of situation is determined, the fit between the leader and the
situation can be evaluated. Leaders will not be effective in all situations.

Contingency theory represents a major shift in leadership research from focusing only on the
leader to considering the situational context. Its lesson has been to emphasize the importance of
matching a leaders style with the demands of a situation and wider context. In everyday life we have


noticed that some executives, who may be extremely successful in one organization, can fail in another
organization with a different culture, values and way of operation.

The contingency theory has many applications in the real world. It can explain for example why an
individual is effective or ineffective in a certain situation based on the various variables. It can also
predict whether an individual was effective in a certain position can be effective in another.

Strengths
It is supported by a great deal of empirical research
It has forced us to consider the impact of situations on leaders
It is predictive and provides useful information regarding the type of leadership that will most
likely be effective in certain contexts
It is realistic in saying that leaders should not expect to be able to lead effectively in
every situation
It provides data on leaders styles that could be useful to organizations in developing leadership
profiles.

Weakness
It fails to explain fully, why individuals with certain leadership styles are more effective in some
situations than in others. Fiedler calls this a "Black Box". The theory explains that the low LPCs are
effective in extreme situations is that they feel more certain where they have control.
The leadership scale, which the model uses, is often criticized. It does not seem valid on the
surface.
It is difficult to apply in practice. It requires analyzing the leader style and three relatively complex
situational variables.
It fails to explain adequately what organizations should do when there is a mismatch between the
leader and the situation in the workplace.

Leadership Instrument
The LPC scale is used in the contingency theory. It measures your style by having you describe a
coworker with whom you have difficulty completing a job. The scores are indicated by three categories
(Low LPC, Middle LPC, and High LPC). Low LPCs are task motivated. High LPCs are relationship
motivated, and Middle LPCs are socio-independent.


Historical overview of the leadership theory
Basketball teams and surveying teams. Based on his study of the literature on leadership, Fiedler
predicted that people who describe their least preferred coworker in positive terms would make better
leaders. Such people, he theorized would be able to get along with a wider variety of people. To test
this idea he decided to measure the LPC of some leaders and correlate their scores with the success of
the group. For this purpose he needed groups for which a clear indication of success was possible. He
chose boys' high school basketball teams in the state of Illinois. At the beginning of the season he went
to a number of teams and had each team member complete the LPC scale. He also asked each boy to
nominate those on the team they liked, those they looked up to, those they hung out with, etc. These


are called sociometric questions. Using his results, Fiedler was able to determine who the informal
leader of the team was. At the end of the season he correlated the informal leader's LPC score with the
team's winning percentage and found a result that surprised him. There was a quite substantial and
statistically significant negative correlation. The leaders with low LPC scores tended to be on winning
teams. Since he had made the opposite prediction, he felt it was necessary to replicate those results
before publishing the results. With another set of high school basketball teams he found the same
results. He replicated the research with three-person surveying teams from engineering classes, using
the instructor's grade on their practice surveys as his measure of success. Again he found that low LPC
informal leaders had more successful teams.

Bomber crews are not basketball teams. Convinced that he had found an important factor involved in
leadership, Fiedler expanded his horizons. He obtained a research grant to study leadership
effectiveness in Air Force bomber crews. Using very similar techniques to those he had used with the
basketball teams he obtained LPC scores and bombing run scores for a substantial number of bomber
crews. He tested all crew members, but correlated the plane captain's LPC score with the crew's
bombing run scores. To his shock and dismay, the correlation was not significant. Determined to
understand what had happened he tried to determine what differences existed between the bomber
crews and the basketball teams. He though that one important difference might be that in the
basketball teams the leaders were emergent, nominated by the team members, while the plane
captains were assigned. Going back to his data he determined that most plane captains would qualify as
informal leaders using the same criteria he used with the basketball teams. He then dropped the
captains who did not qualify as informal leaders and recalculated the correlation. With this selected sub
sample the correlation was now significantly negative, that is the low LPC captains tended to have crews
with higher bombing run scores. The correlation, however, was substantially lower than those he had
found in his previous studies. So he began searching for another difference between bomber crews and
basketball teams and found one. While all the players on a basketball team must work hard and play
together to win games, the same was not true of bomber crews, at least not on practice bombing runs.
He determined that on a bombing run there is one key member of the team whose actions determine
how high the score will be. On daylight bombing runs this was the bombardier, on nighttime runs it was
the radar operator.

The first contingency. Armed with this information Fiedler began to look at how the dynamics of the
relationship between the captain and his key man might be involved in the failure to find strong support
for the relationship of low LPC with effective leadership. Since Fiedler had obtained sociometric
nominations from the bomber crews, he was able to determine how each captain felt about his key
man. Some plane captains had named a key man as someone they liked to work with and some plan
captains had not named a key man as someone they liked to work with. Fiedler then divided the sample
up into those captains who felt positively toward a key man and those who did not. He then correlated
the captains' LPC scores with the bombing run scores within each of those two groups. The results were
striking. In the group of crews where the captain felt positively about the key man, the correlation was
substantial, significant and negative. As with the basketball teams, plane captains in that subsample
with low LPC scores had high bombing run scores and those with high LPC scores had low bombing run
scores. Surprisingly, in the subsample of crews where the plane captain had not voiced positive feelings
for the key man, the correlation was significant, substantial and positive. In that subsample, plane
captains with high LPC scores had high bombing run scores and captains with low LPC scores had low
bombing run scores. In the bomber crews the relationship between leader's LPC score and team success
was contingent on the kind of relationship between the captain and the key man on the team.



Fiedler interpreted these results to mean that there was an optimum distance that needed to be
maintained between a leader and his/her followers. He felt that low LPC leaders tend to be somewhat
distant because of their basic leadership style. He also proposed that when a leader nominated a key
man as someone he liked to work with, that leader tended to have a more close relationship with that
man. On the other hand, when the leader did not feel that the key man was someone he liked to work
with, that leader tended to have a more distant relationship with that man. The explanation went as
follows. A low LPC leader tends to be somewhat distant by nature. When this low LPC leader chooses
the key man as someone he likes to work with, the distance is not increased and they work productively
together. When the low LPC leader does not like to work with the key man, the distance is further
increased to a level too great for a productive working relationship.

A high LPC leader, on the other hand, tends to maintain quite close relationships with people because of
his basic nature. When the high LPC leader chooses the key man as someone he likes to work with, the
naturally close relationship becomes perhaps even closer, too close for a good leader-follower
interaction. In these conditions the leader may fail to be as critical and demanding as a leader needs to
be in order to get the best productivity from a follower. When a high LPC leader does not meet a key
man with whom he likes to work, he creates enough distance to maintain a productive working
relationship. This conclusion suggests an interesting application. If you are a high LPC person (that is you
describe your least preferred coworker in very positive terms) then you should try to work with people
you don't particularly like if you want to be productive. On the other hand if you are a low LPC person
(you describe your least preferred coworker in quite negative terms) then you should try to work with
people you like and respect. Fiedler abandoned this social distance interpretation when he developed
the full contingency theory.

The contingency theory. Fiedler and his associates conducted many research studies on LPC and leader
effectiveness over the next several years. In that period he discovered two other contingencies that had
a moderating effect on the relationship between LPC and leader effectiveness. Eventually he arranged
the three contingencies he had found in the manner shown in figure 6.1 on page 111 of the textbook. By
dichotomizing each of the contingencies, he produced eight combinations arranged in the order shown.
As the textbook author points out, the contingency combinations going from left to right are considered
also to be from most favorable to least favorable for the leader. Thus we can see that the most
important contingency is leader-member relations, because a situation with good leader-member
relations is always considered better than a situation with poor leader-member relations regardless of
the nature of the other contingencies. We can also see that task structure is more important than
leader position power, since a high structure situation is always better than a low structure situation
regardless of the amount of position power.

Fiedler then surveyed the research that had been done to that time using LPC and placed each study
into a category based on leader-member relations, task structure, and position power of the leader. In
seven of the eight categories there were at least a few studies relating leader LPC to performance of the
group. In the three most favorable categories on the left (octants 1, 2 and 3) the average relationship
was quite substantially negative and almost all the studies produced a negative relationship between
leader LPC scores and performance. Surprisingly, in octant 4 (good leader-member relations, low
structure and weak position power) the relationship shifted in the opposite direction. In octant 4 the
average relationship between LPC and performance was substantially positive, meaning that in these
conditions high LPC leaders tended to have groups with high performance and low LPC leaders tended
to have groups with low performance. Nearly all the studies that fell into octant four produced positive
relationships between LPC and group performance. The studies in octant five produced results similar to


those in octant four. Fiedler actually had no studies where the conditions fell into octant six when he
first proposed the contingency theory in 1964. In octant seven the average relationship between LPC
and performance was positive but low. In octant eight the average swung quite sharply again. In the
conditions of octant eight, where none of the contingencies were favorable for the leader, the average
relationship was substantially negative and almost all of the studies produced a negative relationship. In
these worst conditions for a leader, low LPC leaders were again clearly more effective in producing
results. Subsequent research predicts which kind of leader is likely to be more effective for each octant.
There is still some doubt, however, whether a clear prediction can be made for octant seven.

Fiedler's interpretation of the theory. In his many publications on the model, Fiedler proposes that the
low LPC leader who is effective in promoting productivity in both the three most favorable contingency
situations (octants 1, 2 and 3) and the most unfavorable situation (octant 8) does not behave the same
in the favorable and unfavorable circumstances. He has suggested that all leaders prioritize what they
try to accomplish. For a low LPC leader, the main focus is goal achievement and task accomplishment
and the secondary focus is building good relationships and developing followers. The reverse is true of
the high LPC leader. His or her main goal is building good relationships with the secondary goal of task
accomplishment. In situations which are moderately to very difficult for the leader, most of his or her
efforts go into promoting the main goal--task accomplishment for the low LPC leader, and relationship
building for the high LPC leader. According to contingency theory, in the worst conditions for a leader
(octant 8), working for task accomplishment at all costs is apparently the best thing to do. In this
unfavorable situation, the low LPC leader shines. In moderately difficult situations (octants 4, 5 and 6), it
appears that a strong, driving task orientation on the part of the leader does not work very well. In
those moderately difficult situations, the high LPC leader is more successful.

In the three most favorable contingency situations (octants 1, 2 and 3), the leader has the luxury of
taking it easy on his/her main goal and putting effort into the secondary goal. The high LPC leader may
press harder for task accomplishment in these situations feeling that the goal of relationship
development does not require so much attention. The low LPC leader on the other hand, backs off from
so much pressure on task accomplishment and puts more effort into relationship building. Fiedler has
indicated that he has evidence that low LPC leaders engage in more relationship behaviors than high
LPC leaders in these situations that are favorable for the leader.

The effects of training and experience on leader effectiveness. Some of the most interesting and
provocative aspects of contingency theory involve ideas about the effect of training and experience on
leader effectiveness. According to contingency theory, training and experience allows the leader to give
more structure to his or her work situation. In other words, if a leader is working in a situation where
the task has low structure, such as octants 3 and 4 and octants 7 and 8, as he or she gains experience or
is given good training the task becomes more structured. Thus a leader in a situation like octant 4, with
good leader-follower relations, low structure and weak power, would with training and experience
change to a situation like octant 2, with good leader-follower relations, high structure and weak power.
At first glance, this should be a good thing, transforming a moderately difficult situation into one that is
much more favorable for the leader. But wait. If the leader in question is high LPC, he or she was likely
quite effective working in the octant 4 situation. Shifting this leader to octant 2, according to
contingency theory, would result in lowered effectiveness. However, if the leader were low LPC the shift
from octant 4 to octant 2 should increase effectiveness.

In another example, if the leader starts in octant 8, with poor leader-follower relations, low structure
and weak power, and is able through training and experience to bring structure to the task, he or she


would end up in octant 6. In this case we would expect improved performance from high LPC leaders
and reduced performance from low LPC leaders. In other words the effectiveness of training and
experience in improving leader performance depends on the LPC scores of the leaders you train and the
contingency situation in which they are now working. This conclusion suggests that in some situations a
little (or a lot) of training can be a dangerous thing. Fiedler has even suggested that some leaders be
rotated back into more unfavorable circumstances when their experience has allowed them to improve
the situation by imposing greater structure.

Martin Chemers, at the University of Utah, conducted a fascinating study that demonstrated the
differential effect of training based on the LPC of the leader and the contingencies of the situation. The
study was conducted at the height of the Viet Nam war. At that time students at most universities,
including the University of Utah, felt quite negatively about the government, the military, and the war.
Chemers used Army ROTC cadets from the university as his leaders. The study was conducted on days
when they would be wearing their uniforms. The other students in the groups were not ROTC cadets,
creating conditions where the leader follower relations would likely not be very good. The task the
groups were given was to decode messages. The groups were not given any training or instruction in
how to go about breaking these codes, guaranteeing that the task was quite unstructured. Since these
groups met in a lab as volunteers for a psychology experiment and were given credit for just showing
up, the leaders had no position power over the other group members. The situation was set up to be an
octant 8 combination of contingencies. Half of the ROTC student leaders were high LPC based on an
earlier test, and half were low LPC. Finally, half of the ROTC student leaders were given a short training
session prior to the group meeting on how to go about breaking codes, and half were given no training
at all.

Ordinarily, we would expect all groups whose leaders had been given training in how to break codes to
do better than all groups whose leaders had not been given any training. On the other hand,
contingency theory says that in the worst situation for a leader, octant 8, low LPC leaders should have
groups that perform better than those of low LPC leaders. If the training changed the situation to octant
6, we would expect the trained high LPC leaders to do better than the trained low LPC leaders. This was
exactly what happened. The groups with trained, low LPC leaders solved fewer codes than the groups
with untrained, low LPC leaders. The groups with trained, high LPC leaders performed better than the
groups with untrained, high LPC leaders. In other words, the training helped the leader be more
effective if he was high LPC, but made his performance worse if he was low LPC.

Where does contingency theory fit?
The situational leadership has passed the test of the market. It is very popular with organizations but
has very little research validation. Contingency theory has passed the test of research. It literally grew
out of research relating leadership style with follower productivity. The contingency model is
reproduced in every organizational and industrial psychology textbook, but has made very little impact
on the leadership training of business organizations. Fiedler, Chemers, and others have attempted to
apply the theory through their Leader Match training programs, but these have not been very popular.
The problem seems to be with the basic idea of how much leaders can change their behavior.
Situational leadership seems to make the assumption that an intelligent person can easily change his or
her behavior to match the demands of the situation. All they have to learn is how to diagnose the
development level of their followers. Contingency theory seems to argue that leaders can't really
change. They are effective or ineffective depending on the situation they are in and whether it matches
their own nature. The truth of the matter is likely somewhere in between. Leaders may be able to make
some changes in their behavior, but these changes will be difficult, and require considerable training


and effort. It is also likely that organizations could benefit substantially from devoting more attention to
matching the styles of their leaders to the demands of the situation and moving leaders around to
enhance the match.
The Expectancy Theory
This is not a leadership theory, but I covered it here because the path-goal theory was based on it. The
Expectancy theory was designed to explain why there is not a very high relationship between the offer
of incentives in a workplace and an increase in the effort put forth by the workers there. Expectancy
theory explains the many places where the connection may be broken.

a. The nature of the incentive. What is offered must be valued by the person for whom it is supposed
to have incentive value. For example, workers may be told that if they work hard and perform well
they will be promoted to a supervisory position. Some individuals in the work group may place
high personal value on such a promotion. Others however, may not want the added
responsibilities. So, the first principle of expectancy theory is that the incentive or reward must be
valued by the individual or it will not result in greater work effort.
b. Self-confidence. The worker must believe that if he or she puts forth increased effort, this will
result in the level of performance specified as necessary to earn the incentive. Many workers are
not sure that if they work even harder, they can perform at the specified level.
c. Level of uncertainty about the reward. Many incentives are offered on a vague or uncertain basis.
Workers may be told that if their performance is up to certain standards they will become eligible
for promotion, for raises in pay or bonuses. There are usually not enough promotions so that
everyone who is performing well can be promoted. Often workers do not have faith that effort
and performance level is the primary determinant of who gets promoted. Raises and bonuses are
dependent to some degree on how well the company is doing economically, and not just on how
well employees are performing. As a result, the uncertainty about actually receiving the reward
may cause some workers to feel that purring forth extra effort is not justified by the probability of
receiving the reward.

The bottom line is that a person is likely to put forth extra effort as the result of an offered incentive
only if that person values the reward highly and has a high degree of expectation that such increased
effort will result in actually result in receiving the reward. Path-goal theory is designed to help leaders
understand the various things that may prevent a worker from believing the goal can be reached. The
leader's behavior is designed to help workers believe they can perform well and that performance will
yield many valued rewards.


Path-Goal Theory

This theory is about how leaders motivate subordinates to accomplish goals.
It focuses on enhancing employees performance by focusing on employees motivation.
It first appeared in the 1970s heavily drawing from research on motivation based on the works of
(Evans, 1970), (House,1971), (House & Dessler, 1974).
The path-goal theory emphasis the relationship between the leader's style and the
characteristics of the subordinates and work setting.
Based on the expectancy theory, the Path-Goal theory, assumes that subordinates will be
motivated


o if they think they are capable of performing their work
o if they believe their efforts will result in a certain outcome
o if they believe that the payoffs for their work are worthwhile
Effective leadership will select the style that meets the subordinates needs
o Choose behavior that supplement or complement what is missing in the work setting.
o Leaders information or rewards to subordinates to enhance goal attainment (Indvik, 1986)
Leadership motivates when it makes the path to the goal clear, easy to reach, provide coaching,
removes obstacles, and make the work itself personally satisfying. (House & Mitchell, 1974)
When leaders select the proper style, they increase the subordinates chance for success and
satisfaction.
Path-Goal theory is complex.

The basic principle behind Path-Goal theory

The major components of the Path-Goal theory




Leader Behavior
There are four behaviors, but the theory is left open for inclusion of additional behaviors.
The following 4 behaviors were examined
o Directive
Similar to "Initiating Structure" or "Telling" style in situational leadership
A leader who gives instructions about a task, how is it done, expectations, and the
timeline?
o Supportive
Resembles "Consideration Behavior".
Being friendly and approachable as a leader, attending to the wellbeing and human
needs of subordinates.
Supportive leaders go out of their way to make work pleasant for employees, treat
them as equal.
o Participative
Refers to leaders who invite subordinates to share in decision making.
o Achievement-Oriented
Characterized by a leader who challenges subordinates to perform work at the
highest level possible.
This establishes a higher standard of excellence and seeks continuous improvement.
These leaders show a high degree of confidence that subordinates are capable of
accomplishing the work.
House & Mitchel suggested that leaders may exhibit any or all of these behaviors with various
subordinates and in different situations. The leader is NOT locked into a specific style.


There may be instances where a leader may use a blend of different behaviors.
Leader should adapt their behavior to the situation and the motivation of the subordinates.
The leader behavior itself is contingent on the other two components of the Path-Goal theory
(Characteristics of the subordinate and characteristics of the task)

Subordinates Characteristics
Determines how the leader behavior will be interpreted by subordinates in a given work context.
Research has focused on subordinate needs for affiliation, preferences for structure, desire for
control, and self-perceived levels of task ability.
Affiliation
o The theory predicts that subordinates who have a strong "Affiliation" needs prefer
supportive style. Friendly and concerned leadership is a source of satisfaction.
o The theory predicts that subordinates who are "Dogmatic and Authoritarian" prefer
Directive style. This provides psychological structure and task clarity. These subordinates
feel more comfortable when a leader provide a sense of certainty in the work setting.
Desire for control
o Subordinates with internal locus of control believe they are in charge of the things that
occur in their life.
Participative style is most satisfying. It allows subordinates to feel in charge and be a
part of the decision making.
o Subordinates with external locus of control believe that chance, fate and outside forces are
the determinants of life events.
Directive leadership is best because it parallels the subordinate feelings that outside
forces are in control.
Motivation
o As subordinates confidence of their own abilities go up, the need for directive leadership
goes down.

Task Characteristics
Task characteristics have a major impact on the way a leader's behavior influences subordinates.
The characteristics include
o Design of the subordinate task
o Formal authority system of the organization
o primary work group of subordinates
These characteristics can collectively provide motivating for the subordinates.
An example is when a situation provides a structured task, strong group norms, and an
established authority system, the employees will feel as if they can accomplish the task on their
own. Leadership in these contexts can be seen as unnecessary, un-empathetic, and excessively
controlling.
Other examples that need leadership include tasks that are repetitive, so leadership can keep the
employees motivated, or ambiguous tasks that may need leadership to clarify them.
A special focus of the path-goal theory is for leaders to help remove obstacles. This increases the
odds of the successfully completing the tasks and increases the employees confidence.
in 1996, House published an additional 8 classes of behaviors for the Path-Goal theory
o Directive
o Supportive


o Participative
o Achievement oriented
o Work facilitation
o Group oriented decision process
o Work Group representation and networking
o Valuer based leader behavior
The revised theory asserts that effective leadership need to help subordinates by giving them
what is missing in their environment and by helping them compensate for deficiencies in their
abilities.

Leader Behavior Group Members Task Characteristics
Directive Leadership
Provides guidance and psychological structure
Dogmatic
Authoritarian
Ambiguous
Unclear rules
Complex
Supportive Leadership
Provides nurturance
Unsatisfied
Need affiliation
Need human touch

Repetitive
Unchallenging
Mundane and Mechanical
Participative
Provides Involvement
Autonomous
Need for control
Need for clarity
Ambiguous
Unclear
Unstructured
Achievement Oriented
Provides Challenges
High expectations
Need to excel
Ambiguous
Challenging
Complex

How does the Path-Goal theory work?
The Path-Goal theory is complex, but pragmatic.
It provides a set of assumptions about how leadership styles will interact with characteristics of
subordinates and tasks and how it affects motivation.
The theory provides direction about how leaders can help subordinates to accomplish tasks.
For tasks that are structured, unsatisfying, and frustrating, the theory suggests the supportive
style.
The theory suggests that the directive style is best for the tasks that are ambiguous, unclear
organizational rules, dogmatic, and authoritarian employees.
Participative leadership is also suggested for ambiguous tasks because it brings clarity.
Achievement oriented leadership is most effective in settings where subordinates are required to
perform ambiguous tasks.
Although the path-
goal theory is not applied in many management training programs, it brings many
interesting perspectives to leadership thinking. It was one of the first theories to specify four
conceptually distinct varieties of leadership; not only task-oriented and relationship oriented
leadership. It was also one of the first theories to explain how task and subordinate
characteristics affect the impact of leadership on subordinate performance.


It can be applied at all levels within an organization.

Strengths
It provides a useful theoretical framework for understanding how various leadership behaviors
affect the satisfaction of the subordinates and their performance.
It attempts to integrate the motivation principles of the expectancy theory into a theory of
leadership. It is the only theory that deals with motivation.
It provides a model that in a certain way is very practical.
It reminds leaders of their purpose which is to guide and coach employees as they move along
the path to achieve a goal.

Weaknesses
It is quite complex and tries to incorporate many different aspects of leadership that make it a
little confusing.
It has received only partial support from the many empirical studies
It fails to explain adequately the relationship between leadership behavior and worker
motivation
The approach treats leadership as a one-way event w1here the leader affects the subordinate. It
places a great deal of responsibility on the leader and less on the subordinates which can make
them too dependent on the leader.

Leadership instrument
The path-goal questionnaire is the preferred instrument. The scores represent the four types of
behavior and tells the leader which style they use more dominantly.

Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory
While most theories have emphasized the point of view of the leader, the LMX theory
conceptualize leadership as a process that is centered on the interaction between leaders and
followers.
LMX theory makes a dyadic relationship between leaders and followers as the focal point of the
process.
It was first described in 1975 by Dansereau, Graen, and Haga. It had undergone several revisions
since.
Prior to LMX, researchers treated leadership as something leaders did towards followers and
assumed leaders treated followers in a collective way as a group using an average leadership
style.

Early Studies
This is based on the vertical dyad linkage (VDL theory). The focus was on each of the VDLs that
are formed between the leader and each of the followers.
It was determined there are two dyads:
o in-groups (extra roles)
o out-groups (defined roles)


Subordinates become either part of the in-group or the out-group based on how well they work
with the leader and how the leader works with them. Personality and other characteristics are
related to this process.
Becoming part of the in-groups involves subordinates negotiating with the leader about what
they are willing to do to become part of the group. The activities involve going beyond their
formal job descriptions and the leader in turn does more for these subordinates.
Subordinates that are not interested in taking different job responsibilities become part of the
out-group.
Subordinates in the in-group receives more information, influence, confidence, and concern from
the leaders. They are also more dependable, highly involved, and more communicative.
Subordinates in the out-group are less involved and receive less attention and perks from the
leader. They just come to work, do their job and go home.



Later Studies
A shift in focus took place. Early studies focus on in-groups and out-groups. Later studies focused
on how the LMX theory is related to the organizational effectiveness.
Research determined that high-quality Leader-Member exchanges produced
o Less employee turn over
o More positive performance evaluations
o Higher frequency of promotions
o Greater organizational commitment
o More desirable work assignments
o Better job attitudes
o More attention and support from leaders
o Great participation
o Faster career progress over 25 years
Organizations prosper from high quality L-M exchanges

Leadership Making
Stranger Acquaintance Partner
Roles Scripted Tested Negotiated
Influence One Way Mixed Reciprocal


Exchanges Low Quality Medium Quality High Quality
Interests Self Self/Other Group

This is a prescriptive approach to leadership. It emphasizes that a leader should develop high-
quality exchanges with all of their subordinates rather than just a few. It attempts to make every
employee part of the in-group.
Leadership making suggests that leader create partnerships throughout the organization which
benefits the organization at larger as well as their own career.
Graen and Uhl-Bien (1991) suggests that leadership making develops over time in 3 phases
o The stranger phase
Interactions are rule bound.
Relies heavily on contractual relationships
Leader-Member relay to each other within the described organization roles
Lower quality exchanges similar to the out-groups
Subordinate complies with the formal leader who has hierarchical status for the
purpose of achieving economic rewards.
The motives are directed towards self interest rather than the good of the group.
o The acquaintance phase
Begins by an offer from the leader or the subordinate for improved career oriented
social changes.
It involves sharing more resources and personal information.
It is a testing period for both leader and employee.
Dyads shift from away from the prescribed job description and the defined roles.
Leader-Member exchange is improved.
They tend to focus less on self-interest and more on the goals of the group.
o The mature partnership phase
This is a partnership.
High quality leader-member exchanges.
High degree of mutual trust.
Respect and obligation toward each other.
Leaders and subordinates are tied together in a productive way that goes beyond
traditional hierarchy.
Schriesheim, Castro, Zhou, and Yammarino (2001) found that good leader-member
relations were more egalitarian and influence and control were equally balanced.

How does the Leader-Member Exchange theory work?
As a whole, it is a very interesting approach to the leadership process, and it offers us a lot of
ideas to understand better the relationship between a leader and a follower.
Although, this theory has not been packaged to be used in training and development, it offer
much insight that managers can use to improve their leadership behavior.
The ideas set forth by the LMX theory can be used at all levels of the organization.
The ideas also apply to creating networks within an organization and calling upon this network to
help solve problems or advance career goals.
The theory tells us to be fair to all employees, and to be sensitive.
It works in 2 ways:


o It describes leadership - Highlights the importance of recognizing the existence of in-
groups and out-groups.
The differences on how goals are accomplished using the in-groups or out-groups are
substantial.
In-group members do more that job description requires and look for innovative
ways to advance the group. In response, leaders give them more responsibilities and
more opportunities. Leaders also give them more time and support.
Out-group members operate strictly within their prescribed organizational roles.
They do what is required of them, but nothing more. Leaders treat them fairly and
according to the formal contract, but do not give them special attention. They get
standard benefits.
o It prescribes leadership -
The authors advocate that leaders should try to create special relationships with all
subordinates.
Leaders should offer each subordinate the opportunity to take new roles and
responsibilities.
Leaders should nurture high-quality exchanges with their subordinates.
Strengths
It is a strong descriptive theory that makes intuitively sense.
We may not like it because it is unfair, but it is a reality that the theory describes.
It is the only leadership theory that makes the concept of the dyadic relationship the centerpiece
of the leadership process.
It directs our attention to the importance of communication in leadership.
There is also a large body of research that substantiates how the practice of the LMX theory is
related to positive organizational outcomes. It is related to performance, organizational
commitment, job climate, innovation, organizational citizenship behavior, empowerment,
procedural, distributive justice, and career progress.

Weaknesses
On the surface it runs counter to the basic human value of fairness.
The existence of in-groups and out-groups may have undesirable effects on the group as a whole.
Our culture repels the discrimination of age, gender, etc and this theory awakens the
discrimination factors.
Questions have been raised regarding the measurement of leader-member exchanges in this
theory. The measurement scale lacks content validity.
The basic ideas of the theory have not been fully developed. It does not explain how the high-
quality leader-member exchanges are created. It mentioned that personality compatibilities are
key to these high-quality exchanges, but never went in depth about the details.

Leadership instrument
The LMX-7 provides a reliable and valid measure of the quality of leader-member exchanges. It is
designed to measure respect, trust, and obligation.

Transformational Leadership (TL)


This has been the focus of research since the 1980s.
It is based on the "great man" theory, but does not assume that the leader must have all of the
characteristics of the great man in order to be an effective leader.
Part of the "New Leadership" paradigm.
The transformational leader sees the need for change, expansion, or complete transformation in
order to take the organization toward goals that others may not have even imagined. The
transformational leader must have vision, problem-solving skills, and the ability to inspire
followers to go beyond their current requirements, be creative, and change the way they think
about their jobs. Based on these assumptions, many large companies attempt to identify
potential transformational leaders early in their careers and provide them with a variety of
assignments that will develop a very broad perspective. Although the concept of
transformational leadership is difficult to define, the potential gains for the organization are
worth the effort.
Gives more attention to charismatic and affective elements of leadership.
A third of the leadership research today is about "Transformational Leadership" (Lowe &
Gardner, 2001)
It is a process that changes and transforms individuals.
It is concerned with emotions, values, ethics, standards, long-term goals.
It includes assessing followers motives, satisfying their needs, and treating them as human
beings.
It works to influence followers on a 1:1 level, whole organizations, and entire cultures.
Both followers and leaders are bound together in the transformational process.
The term was coined by Downton (1973), but the emergence of the theory was through James
MacGregor Burns in 1978.
o Leaders are those who tap the motives of the followers in order to better reach the goals
of the leaders and followers.
Burns distinguished between two types of leadership
o Transactional
This is the bulk of leadership models which focuses on exchanges between
leaders/followers.
Examples include politicians who win votes by promising less taxes or managers who
offer promotions to employees who surpass their goals.
o Transformational
Refers to the process where an individual engages with others and creates a
connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in both leader and
follower.
This type of leadership helps followers reach their full potential.
Examples include Mohandas Gandhi or a manager who attempts to change their
company's corporate values to reflect a more human standard of fairness and justice.

Transformational Leadership and Charisma - House
o House published the charismatic Leadership in 1976.
o Burns published a book in 1976 about the Transformational Leadership theory. It received a great
deal of attention.
o The concept of "Charisma" was first used to describe a special gift that select individuals possess.
It gives them extraordinary powers. It gives them superhuman exceptional powers. (Weber,
1947)


o Weber recognized the important role played by followers in validating charisma.
o The personal characteristics of a charisma leader include
o Being dominant
o Having strong desire to influence
o Self-confident
o Strong sense of one's own values
o Charismatic leaders also
Strong role models for the beliefs and values they want their followers to adopt.
They appear competent.
They articulate ideological goals that have moral overtones (example: Martin Luther King)
Communicate high expectations to followers
They exhibit confidence in followers abilities to meet expectations. This increases the
followers sense of competence and self-efficacy.
Arouse task relevant motives in followers including affiliation, power, and esteem.
(Example: JFK, appealing to values of the American people, ask not what your country can
do for you, but ask what you can do for your country.)
o Effects of charismatic relationship according to House. These mostly occur in stressful situations.
Follower's trust in the leader's ideology.
Similarity between follower's and leader's beliefs.
Unquestioned acceptance of the leader.
Expression of warmth towards the leader.
Follower obedience.
Identification with the leader.
Emotional involvement in the leader's goals.
Heightened goals for the followers.
Follower's confidence in goal achievement.

Personality
Characteristics
Behaviors Effects on followers
Dominant Sets strong role model Trust in Leader's ideology
Desire to influence Shows Competence Belief similarity between leader and
follower
Confident Articulates Goals Unquestioning acceptance
Strong Values Communicates High
Expectations
Affection toward leader
Expresses Confidence Obedience
Arouses Motives Identification with Leader
Emotional involvement
Heightened Goals
Increased confidence
House - Personal Characteristics for Charismatic Leaders.



A model of Transformational Leadership - Bass
o (Bass, 1985) provided a more expanded version of the transformational leadership.
o Bass extended Burn's theory by focusing more on followers rather than leaders' needs.
Suggested that TL could apply to situations to which the outcomes were not positive.
Contended that transactional and transformational leadership were on a single continuum.
o Bass extended House's theory by giving more attention to the emotional elements and origins of
charisma.
He suggested that charisma is necessary, but not sufficient for transformational leadership.
o Bass suggested that Transformational leadership motivates followers by:
Raising followers consciousness about the importance and value of idealized goals.
Getting followers to transcend their own self-interest for the sake of the organization.
Moving followers to address higher level needs.

Transformational Leadership factors
o TL is concerned with performance of the followers and developing them to their fullest potential
(Avolio, 1999; Bass & Avolio, 1990). Individuals who exhibit TL often have a strong set of internal
values and ideals, they are effective at motivating followers to act in ways that support te greater
good rather than their own self-interest (Kuhnert, 1994).
o There are 7 factors that are included in the transactional/transformational model.
Transformational Leadership
Factor #1 - Idealized influence/Charisma
Factor #2 - Inspirational Motivation
Factor #3 - Intellectual Stimulation
Factor #4 - Individualized Consideration
Transactional Leadership
Factor #5 - Contingent Reward, Constructive transactions
Factor #6 - Management by exception, Active and Passive corrective Transactions.
Laissez-Faire Leadership
Factor #7 - Laissez-Faire non-transactional

Transformational Leadership Factors (Very Effective)
Generally speaking, transactional leadership results in expected outcome while transformational
leadership results go beyond the expectations.


Idealized Influence
Identifies leaders who are charismatic and are strong role models.
Followers identify with these leaders and want to emulate them.
Leader usually have very high standards and ethical conduct.
Leaders here can be counted on to do the right thing.
They are deeply respected by followers.
Followers place a great deal of trust in them.
These leaders provide followers with vision and a sense of mission.
Example: Nelson Mandela - Transformed and entire nation.
Inspirational Motivation
This is descriptive of leaders who communicate high expectations to followers and
inspiring them through motivation to become committed.
These leaders use symbols and emotional appeals to focus group members' efforts
to achieve more.
Team spirit is enhanced by this type of leadership.
Example: A sales manager who encourages his team through words to excel.
Intellectual Stimulation
Leadership that stimulates followers to be creative and innovative, and challenges
their own beliefs.
Supports followers as they try new approaches and innovative ways.
It promotes problem solving.
Individualized Consideration
Representative of leaders who provide supportive climates where they listen
carefully to the needs of followers.
They coach and advise while assisting followers to become fully actualized.
These leaders may use delegation as a mean to help followers grow.

Transactional Leadership Factors (Effective)
This differs from transformational in that the leader does not individualize the needs of the
followers nor focus on their development. They are effective because it is in the best interest of
the subordinates to do what the leader wants them to do. They essentially exchange things of
value with subordinates.
Contingent Reward
Efforts by the followers are exchanged for a specific reward.
Example: A college dean who negotiates the number of publications needed for a
promotion.
Management-by-exception
Refers to leadership that involves corrective criticism, negative feedback, and
negative reinforcements.
Active Management-by-exception
An example is a supervisor that closely monitors subordinate mistakes
and makes corrective actions immediately.
Passive Management-by-exception
An example is a supervisor that monitors subordinates mistakes and
gives a poor performance evaluation.
Non-Leadership Factors (Ineffective)


This is the absence of leadership.
Laissez-Faire
Abdicates responsibility.
Delay decisions.
Give no feedback.
Makes little or no efforts to help followers satisfy their needs.




Other models and perspective
The research of (Bennis & Nanus, 1985) and (Tichy & DeVanna, 1986, 1990) offered other perspectives.
They used similar methodologies by interviewing a number of CEOs using unstructured open-ended
questions.

Bennis and Nanus
o They asked CEOs 90 questions such as What re your strengths and weaknesses? Events? Critical
career points?, etc.
o They identified 4 common strategies used by leaders to transform organizations
Clear vision of the future state of their organizations.
Visions are attractive, realistic, believable, understandable, beneficial and energy
creating.
The compelling nature of the vision touched the experiences of followers.
The vision needs to grow out of the needs of the entire organization.
While leaders play a role in articulating the vision, it emerges from both leaders and
followers.


These leaders were social architects of their organizations
Communicate direction that transforms the values and norms.
They move people to accept new group identity and philosophy of organizations.
These leaders create "Trust" in the organizations.
They make their position known and stand by it.
Being predictable and reliable.
When leaders create trust in the organizations, it establishes a sense of identity .
They use creative-deployment of self through positive self-regard.
Leaders knew their strengths and weaknesses.
They emphasized their strengths in instead of dwelling in their weaknesses.

Trichy and DeVanna
Similar to Bennis and Nanus, they studies 12 CEOs of mostly large corporations. They mostly focused
on how leaders carried out the change process. They wanted to find out how leader bring change when
working under challenging conditions such as increased competition, cultural changes, rapid
technological changes, etc. They found out that leaders bring change through a 3 steps process.
o Act 1 - Recognize the need for change
There is a tendency to be comfortable with the status quo and resist change.
The need for change sometimes go unrecognized.
These leaders are change agents.
Three techniques were suggested by Trichy and DeVanna to increase openness for change.
Encourage dissent and allow people to disagree
Encourage objective assessment of how well an organization is meeting it goals.
Encourage members of the organizations to visit other organizations to obtain
different view points.
o Act 2 - The creation of the vision
A vision creates the conceptual roadmap where an organization is headed.
Develop a mission statement as it is the center piece of creating a vision.
o Act 3 - Institutionalizing change
Leaders need to break down old structures and establish new ones.
Find new followers to implement new ideas.
May need to create a new coalition of followers to be compatible with the vision.

How does the Transformational theory work?
This theory is a broad-based approach that encompasses many facets and dimensions of
leadership.
It describes how leaders can initiate, develop, and carry out significant changes in organizations.
It sets out to empower followers and nurture them, it raises their conciseness and transcend
their own self-interest for the sake of others.
Leaders become strong role models with a highly developed set of values, self-determined sense
of identity, confident, competent, and articulate.
Followers want to emulate transformational leaders.
Leaders create a vision which becomes the focal point of the organization.
Out of uncertainty, transformational leaders create change.
Transformational leaders become social architects, clarifying the values and norms in an
organization.


Transformational Leadership does not tell people what to do, but provides a broad set of
generalizations. It does not tell the leader how they should act in a particular situation, but it
provides a general way of thinking about leadership.
Transformational Leadership can be taught in organizations at all levels, affect performance,
used in recruitment process, promotions, and training and development.
The training and development begins by basically working with leaders on their Vision/Mission
statements.

Strengths
It is a current model that has received a lot of attention by researchers and has been widely
researched using qualitative studies of prominent CEOs.
It has a strong intuitive appeal. It is consistent with the society's popular notion of what
leadership is. People are attracted to transformational leaders.
It emphasizes the importance of followers in the leadership process.
It goes beyond traditional transactional models and broadens leadership to include the growth of
followers.
It places strong emphasis on morals and values.
There is substantial evidence that transformational leadership is an effective form of leadership
(Yukl, 1999)

Weaknesses
It lacks conceptual clarity because it covers many aspects (Creating visions, motivation, change
agents, trust, social architects, etc.)
There are some doubts about the validity of the MLQ measuring transformational leadership.
It sometimes implies that transformational leadership has a trait-like quality. These leaders are
often seen as visionaries.
It can be seen as elitist and undemocratic because the leaders create the vision and change
directions.
Research data focus heavily on senior-level leaders. The data may apply to leaders of
organizations and not necessarily leaders in organizations.
It has the potential to be abused because it is concerned with changing people's values and
moving them to a new vision.

Leadership instrument
The MLQ is made up of questions that measures the leader's behavior and perception of the seven
factors in the transformational leadership. There is also an abbreviated version called MLQ-6S
developed by Avolio in 1992.


The Team Leadership theory
o This approach has become one of the most popular and rapidly growing areas of leadership today.
o Teams are organizational groups who are interdependent, share common goals, and must
coordinate activities to reach their goals.


o The study of groups began in the 1920s and 1930 (Porter and Beyerlein, 2000) with focus on
human relations. The focus shifted to "group dynamics" in the 1940s. The focus shifted again in
the 1950s moved to sensitivity training and T-Groups. In the 1960s/70s, the focus shifted to
developing team and leadership effectiveness through intervention. Due to competition from
Japan in the 1980s, the focus shifted to quality teams, benchmarking and improvement. In the
1990s, while still focused on quality, shifted to global perspective.
o The organizational team structure is one way organizations today can respond to adapt to the
rapidly changing workplace conditions (new technology, global economy, economic competition,
and increasing diversity).
o Current research I focused on practical problems and how to make teams more effective.
o Effective team leadership is the primary ingredient of team success (Zaccaro, Ritman, & Marks,
2001). Ineffective leadership is the primary reasons why teams fail to develop, yield improvement,
and quality.
o The organizational structure of excellent companies has changed from a functional and
matrix organization into a process and team organization. Teams are important performance and
learning units in organizations today. Team work should enable the company to offer better
customer service, improve the efficiency of internal processes and improve the motivation of
personnel. It should be remembered that a team is a means of operation, not a goal itself; it
should always be evaluated, if team work is the best way to achieve the objective. Moving over
to team work is a lengthy development process itself, which needs a lot of training. A working
group needs time to develop through different phases of being a pseudo-team, potential team
and real team (Katzenbach & Smith 1994, 84). Nevertheless, the use of organizational teams has
been found to lead to greater productivity, more effective use of resources, better decisions and
problem solving, better quality product and services and increased innovation and creativity
(Parker 1990).
o Organizing and leading teams, rather than groups engaged in working together to manufacture or
sell a product, has proved challenging. Organizations that are able to make teams work have a
significant advantage in the world market.
o The team leadership and the team leadership model do not compose a theory that makes
predictions and is tested by research. This discussion is more of an attempt to highlight the special
problems and difficulties that exist in the leadership of teams. It identifies places to look when
problems arise in working with a team and gives a new team leader some guidelines as to how
she or he could analyze and approach the task at hand.

Leader roles in the various team structures.




The "Functional Model" of the team Leadership
o Early scholars identified two critical functions of leadership:
Help the group accomplish its task. (Team Performance)
Include solving problems, adapting to changes, making plans, achieving goals.
Keep the group maintained and functional. (Team Development)
Include developing positive climate, solving interpersonal problems, satisfying
members' needs, and developing cohesion.
o The current focus of research is on "teams" as opposed to "groups". It also focuses on the effect
of the environment on the teams.
o Effective leadership helps the team balance the internal and external demands.
o McGrath developed a model for team leadership that looks at two dimensions:
Monitoring versus taking actions
Focus on internal group issues versus external group issues.
o The functions within this model of leadership does not require that the leader alone carries the
responsibility of execution, but experienced members within the team itself can also share these
leadership behaviors as well.
o The key assertion of the functional model is that a leader needs to do whatever in order to take
care of any unmet needs of the team. If the team members are taking care of most of the needs
then the leader has to do very little.





o The functional model is a practical approach that is designed primarily to answer "What functions
does the leader perform to help the group be more effective?"
o The leader is the one who processes information (Barge, 1996). They essentially help the team
develop an organizing framework or set of procedures. This structure help both the leader and
teams members interprets information, make judgments, and take action for the good of the
group.
o Effective team performance begins with the leader's mental model of the situation. The mental
model reflects not only the components of the problem confronting the team, but also the
environmental and organizational contingencies that define the larger context. Here the leader
develops a mental model of what the team problems are within the current context. The leader
needs to be behaviorally flexible.

Monitoring
o To develop an accurate mental model, a leader needs to monitor both internal and external
environments, continually gather information, reduce equivocality, provide structure, and
overcome barriers.
o There are two phases to monitoring (defined by Fleishman et al., 1991)
Information search: seek out information
Information structuring: Analyze, organize, and interpret.
o All members of the group can be engaged in monitoring (information search and structure)

Action Taking
o In addition to information gathering, there is also taking the 'right' action.
o Action mediation is at the heart of leadership because it involves selecting from among competing
courses of actions and helping the group create a system of organizing that allows the team to
make quality decisions. (Barge, 1996)
o There are two skills for actions mediation
Ability to facilitate decision making and task accomplishment. (Task/Team Performance)
Ability to manage interpersonal relations (Team Development)
o Team leaders must learn to be open and objective about diagnosing the team problems and
skillful at selecting the most appropriate actions to help achieve the team goal.



Characteristics of effective teams
o Teams are judged on their performance outcomes and achievements.
o Researchers began to study organizational work teams t better understand what makes them
effective or ineffective (Hackman, 1990; Hughes, Ginnett & Curphey, 1993; LaFasto & Larson,
2001; Zaccaro, 2001)
o The following criteria were suggested by Hackman and Walton in 1986 as necessary for
effectiveness of task-performing teams:
Clear, engaging direction.
An enabling Performance situation.
A group structure that foster competent task work.
An organizational context that supports and reinforces excellence.
Available, expert coaching and process assistance.
3. Adequate material recourses.
o Larson and LaFasto (1989) conducted research that included 6000 team members and 600 leaders
from various industries. They found that regardless of the type of team, there were 8
characteristics that were associated with team excellence.





o Clear, elevating goals
Team goals need to be very clear to easily tell if objectives have been realized.
Team can fail due to vague goals or if other things replace or shadow the goals such as
personal agendas, or power issues, etc.
Leaders need to keep the team focused on the goal.
Results-driven structure
Teams need to have the best possible structure in order to accomplish their goals.
Top management for example deal with power and influence, task forces deal with ideas,
customer service teams deal with clients, production teams deal with technology, etc.
Problem solving team such as task force need to have a structure that emphasizes
'trust' so that everyone contributes
Creative teams need to have a structure that emphasizes autonomy to that everyone
can take risks.


Tactical teams such as an emergency room team need to have a structure that
emphasizes clarity.
3. Competent team members
Groups should be composed of the right number and mix of members to accomplish the
tasks.
Members need to be provided with sufficient information, training and education.
Team members need to not only be able to do the job, but to be able to collaboratively
work together.
4. Unified Commitment
Team need to develop a sense of unity and identification.
This can be developed by involving team members in all aspects of the process (Larson &
LaFasto, 1989).
5. Collaborative climate
Trust based on honesty, openness, consistency, and respect seems to be essential for
building a collaborative climate.
Members should feel free to compensate for one another, take risks, listen to each other,
be focused on the problems, and listen to each other.
The cause of team failures may reside not only in member inability, but also in their
collaborative failure to coordinate and synchronize their individual contributions (Zaccaro,
2001).
6. Standards of excellence
It is important to setup standards of excellence within a team for their processes. This will
pressure the members to perform at their highest levels. The standards need to be clear
and concrete.
The team leader can facilitate this process by:
Requiring results - making expectations clear
Reviewing results - providing feedback to resolve performance issues.
Rewarding results - Acknowledge superior performance.
7. Principled leadership
Leadership is central to the team effectiveness (Zaccaro, 2001). It affects the team through
four sets of processes:
Cognitive - Helps the team understand the problems facing the team.
Motivational - The leader helps the team become cohesive and capable of setting
high performance standards and accomplishing them.
Affective - Helps the team handle stress circumstances by providing career goals,
assignments and strategies.
Coordination - Leader coordinate team activities by matching skills with roles.
8. External support
A common mistake is to give organizational teams challenging assignments, but no
organizational support to accomplish these assignments (Hackman, 1990)
The best goals do not mean much if you don't have money, equipment, or supplies to
accomplish the goals.

Leaders can reduce the effectiveness of their team when they are unwilling to confront inadequate
performance, when they dilute the team's ability to perform by having too many priorities, and by
overwhelming the positive aspects of team performance. Effective leaders perform the following
behaviors:
1. Keeps the team focused on the goal


2. Maintains a collaborative climate
3. Builds confidence among members
4. Demonstrates technical competence
5. Set priorities
6. Manages performance


Team Leadership Model
Hill (2001) has also developed a model for team leadership. The model attempts to integrate what
we know about teams, leadership and effectiveness and to provide specific actions (Mental roadmap)
that leaders can perform to improve team work. Effective team leaders need a wide repertoire of
competencies, which can be different than traditional leaders need. Team leaders and members
could use the model to support decision-making about the current state of the team and to consider
what specific actions they need to take to improve the teams functioning. The model should offer a
cognitive map to analyze the team situation



The model demonstrates the mediation decisions that a leader must make?


1. Decision #1 - Whether monitoring or action taking is the most appropriate for the issue at hand.
2. Decision #2 - If an action course is needed, then the leaders asks what level of team process
needs leadership attention? Is it internal, external, team issues, etc.
3. Decision #3 - Determine the most appropriate function or skill to be performed in the
intervention. Actions must be carefully selected based on the situation.

There are three sets of skills that a leader need to implement
1. Internal task leadership functions (this is to improve Task Performance)
Goal focusing (clarifying, gaining agreement)
Structuring for results (Planning, organizing, clarifying roles, delegating)
Facilitating decision making (informing, controlling, coordinating, mediating, synthesizing,
issue focusing)
Training team members in task skills (Educating, Developing)
Maintaining standards of excellence (Assuming team and individual performance,
confronting inadequate performance)
2. Internal relationship leadership functions (this is to improve Team Relationship)
Coaching team members in interpersonal skills.
Collaborating (including, involving).
Managing conflicts and power issues (Avoiding confrontation, questioning ideas).
Building commitment and esprit de corps (being optimistic, innovating, envisioning,
socializing, rewarding, and recognizing).
Satisfying individual member needs (trusting, supporting, advocating).
Modeling ethical and principled practices (fair, consistent, and normative).
3.
External environmental Leadership functions (This is to improve environmental interface with
the team) - Teams do not exist in a vacuum.
Networking and forming alliances in environment (gather information, increase influence).
Advocating and representing team to environment.
Negotiating upward to secure necessary resources, support, and recognition for the team.
Buffering the team member from environmental distractions.
Assessing environmental indicators of team's effectiveness (surveys, evaluations,
performance indicators).
Sharing relevant environmental information with team.

How does the Team Leadership theory work?
o Leaders can use this model to help them make decisions about the current state of their teams
and realize what actions they need to take to improve the team's functioning in order to achieve
effectiveness.
o The model provides the leader with a cognitive map to identify group needs.
o The model helps the leader make sense of the complexity of groups and offer practical
suggestions.
o The model helps the leader understand whether they need to monitor or take actions.
o Helps the leader distinguish between internal and external challenges.
o The model helps point the way to constant team analysis.
o Research suggests that team leaders overestimate their effectiveness on the dimensions of
leadership. They score themselves much higher than group members. By comparing scores by the
leader and members, the leaders can determine which dimensions of team or leadership are in
need or improvement.


Strengths
o It focuses on real life organizational work teams and the leadership needed therein. This has not
been the focus of other approaches.
o It provides a practical model that helps leaders to design and maintain effective teams especially
when performance is below standards.
o It takes into account the changing role of leaders and followers in organizations.
o It can help selecting team leaders by clarifying the competencies which an effective team leader
will need. It can help in the process of selecting team leaders.
Weaknesses
o It is a new approach, and it is not completely supported or tested by research. Would the model
hold true in the new technology connected virtual teams?
o Although the theory takes into account the complexity of teas, it is complex in and of itself.
o It does not offer on the spot answers for specific situations.
o It is still more like a framework, but doesnt offer clear answers to specific situations for
the team leader.
o It doesnt either offer clear instructions how to focus team leadership training.

Leadership instrument
Several instruments are available, but Larson & LaFasto, 1989 have developed a survey after studying
many excellent organizations teams. Their research has demonstrated 8 criteria or factors that are
consistently associated with high performing teams. The team excellence survey contains more than 40
questions across the 8 factors to diagnose the team performance. The team members are given the
survey, their results are averaged and compared against the leader's answers.

Psychodynamic Approach
Ernest L. Stech brings together several different attempts to apply psychoanalytic theories to social
relationships, including leadership.

This approach consists of bits and pieces borrowed from a number of scholars and practitioners.
The psychodynamic approach to leadership developed from the methods dealing with
emotionally disturbed individuals and from psychological theories of personality
development. The psychodynamic approach to leadership has its roots in Sigmund
Freuds (1938) development of psychoanalysis. Carl Jung, one of Freuds well-known
disciples, developed his own body of psychology, which is well accepted even today,
whereas classical psychoanalysis has found less acceptance in recent years (Bennet
1983). Maslow (1962, 1971) and Rogers (1961) could maybe be mentioned here as
humanistic psychologists to represent the psychological theory of personality development.
A leading proponent to psychodynamic approach has been Abraham Zalenick (1977). At
the moment the most well-known expert in this area is certainly Manfred Kets de Vries
(2001). One branch of psychodynamic theory is called psychohistory, which attempts to
explain the behavior of famous historical figures (see eg. Kets de Vries 1999).
The psychodynamic approach places emphasis on leaders obtaining insight into their
personality characteristics and understanding the responses of subordinates, based on
their personalities. Leaders should also encourage work group members to gain insight into
their own personalities so that they could understand their reactions to the leader and


each other. Important concepts in psychodynamic approach to leadership include e.g. the
family of origin, individuation, dependence and independence, regression and the shadow
self. These concepts come from psychoanalysis and psychiatry and can sometimes be
abstruse and not easily understood. That is the reason that there has been attempts to
make psychodynamic theory more accessible.
o There are several fundamental propositions underlying this approach.
Leaders are more effective when they have an insight into their own psychological makeup.
Leaders are more effective when they understand the psychological makeup of their
subordinates.
This approach makes no assumptions about personality characteristics or styles. It
emphasizes that a leader should have an insight into his or her emotional responses and
habitual patterns of behavior. An authoritarian leader, as an example, can be effective if she
understands that her own behaviors arise from influences in the past. It is also better if the
leader also has an understanding how their behaviors result in different responses.
An important assumption is that the personality characteristics of individuals are deeply
ingrained and virtually impossible to change. The key is acceptance of one's own personality
feature and quirks and the understanding and acceptance of features and quirks of others.

BACKGROUND
o The emergence of this approach has its roots in the works of Sigmund Freud, 1938. He was
followed by Carl Jung who developed the Jungian psychology.
o The roots are in the individual and family.
o Our first experience of leadership was when we were born. Mom and dad were our leaders.
o Based on the childhood experiences, some people respond and respect authority figures, others
rebel.
o Abraham Zaleznik (1977), a management professor at Harvard is a leading proponent of this
approach. He is also behind much of the work on the charismatic leadership theory.


Important Concepts in the Psychodynamic approach
o Family of Origin
Underlies any understanding of the behavior of adults.
Each of us begins our life into a family of two parents and one or more children (Today,
there are many more single parent homes)
The child begins life as a very self-centered being, more animal than human.
The parents role in the early infancy is to meet the child's needs.
In one sense the parent has control over the child, but the child also has an equal degree of
control.
Such total dependency can take place in leadership situations. The leader takes total
responsibility for the subordinates (Paternalistic Management"
o Maturation or individualization
The child becomes more independent of the parents with time. Though the child drifts away
from the parental home, they still carry a parent inside Parent Within" or conscience that is
constantly supervising, Analyzing, or judging.


The individualization is the process of a child as they step into adolescence, they become
unique and different from each parent. A child on the other hand is attached to their parent
with a psychological umbilical cord.
Two key issues in the individualization process.
The relationship to authority figures.
Highly authoritarian parent can induce either a very submissive or very resistant
attitude in a child.
A Laissez-Faire can create a confused child who has trouble defining boundaries
and limits.
Responses to authority figures just happen. They are not rational.
Intimacy and openness
Parents range along a continuum of kindness, tenderness, and nurturance.
As an adult, one may continue the style of the parent or rebel and choose the
opposite.
A nurturing leader can produce feelings of warmth and even love in a
subordinate.
o Dependence and Independence
A leader's style results from the models of leadership exhibited by parents, teachers,
coaches, and other adults during the maturation process.
Followers are more likely to react to an authoritarian leaders. Psychodynamic ally, an
individual may react in a
Dependent - Self-explanatory.
Counter dependent - rebelliousness, rejecting directives.
Independent manner - The subordinate assesses leadership attempts and looking at
the situation objectively. The team member decides if the directive is ethical,
reasonable, practical, etc.
o Repression and shadow self
This approach relies on the "Depth Psychology" or subconscious. Most other leadership
theories are based on the behavior or conscious psychology.
Repression: The concept of repression is putting in deep recesses of the mid those thoughts
and feelings that are not deemed acceptable by society.
Shallow: Introduced by Jungian psychology. The shadow self is part of the personality that is
unacceptable and consciously denied existence or expression. The shadow self is often
evident to others although denied by the self. The only way in which we can be aware of
our shadow self is to solicit perceptions of ourselves from others.
o Archetypes
This is a strong pattern in the human psyche that persists over time. It is a template of
human behavior and belief.
Pearson (1989, 1991) setup 6 archetypes. Pearson asserts that the archetypes are not
encountered in a straight line or by everyone. People can get stuck in one of the archetypes.
Most people cycle back and forth.
Innocent
Exists before the journey
Orphan
Moves out of the home/comfortable territory into the world.
Martyr
Devotes time and energy to the welfare of others.
Wanderer


Very independent
Warrior
Goes out into battle such as the professional on the road to success in today's
terms.
Magician
This is not always attained by individuals.

Warrior Leader Magician Leader
Seeks success for self Seeks success for the team
Want to be seen as strong and
aggressive
Wants to be seen as solid and centered
Destroys and conquers competitors Motivated by competition. Adapts ideas from them.
Worries about and denies failure Learns from failure; moves on.
Emotionally neutral Celebrates successes; Grieves failures.
Works for status and Money Work is its own reward
Accumulates money and resources Believes there is enough for everyone; make do with the
minimum.

The warrior and the magician archetypes are concerned with leadership.
The warrior is the stereotype embodying the goals of strength and effectiveness. Hen
faced with danger, the warrior attacks. The wanderer flees, and the martyr sacrifice
self for others. The warrior is competitive and goal oriented. The warrior imposes
his/her will on others. The warrior is controlled (poker face) and repress most feelings
and works for material reward. The warrior want to be seen as confident and
respected.
The magician is the stereotype. It represents the notion of changing the lesser into
the better. It is about transformational. Someone in the magician mode has gone
beyond the aggressive and competitive mode of the warrior. They establish mutuality
in the relationship with subordinates. The magician accepts and understands
emotional responses. They strive to achieve the team goals through the rule,
regulations and norms of an organization. Monetary or status gains are secondary.
This archetype was divided into two types by Maslow
D-Motivation (Deficit): A person who does not have the money, status,
resources, or power and is motivated to get them.
B-Motivation (Being): This person as all of the above and is freed to be
concerned about others, the team, and the organization.

Relational Analysis
o A popular psychodynamic model created by Eric Berne (1961). There are 3 ego states:
The Parent :
Critical - Judgmental, faultfinding, and strict.


Nurturing - Kind, gentle, and loving.
The Child :
Playful: Adaptive and dependent.
Rebellious: Counter dependence subordinate.
The Adult:
As people mature, they operate out of this adult ego state. This is the ability to do
reality testing. People operating out of the adult state, make tentative decisions, and
use trial and error to find out what to do. It also incorporates both the Child and
Parent ego states when needed.
o Cathecting: psychodynamic technical term. This means that each person cathects or pulls out the
other person matching response pattern. A leader who behaves in a parent ego, will cause a
subordinate to behave in child ego and vice versa.
o A good leader will make every effort to operate out the adult ego state. The leader's responsibility
in this approach is to bring issues out into the open so that they can be discussed.




How does the Transformational theory work?
o It is a lifelong endeavor.
o There are many books, seminars, workshops on the subject.
o A self-assessment by Pearson helps the individual determine which archetype predominates their
life at the moment.
o The basic principle is that a leader who understand their style is more effective. Even more
important however, if the leader understands where their style came from (their origins).

The psychodynamic approach brings an important aspect to leadership by emphasizing our past
experiences, unconsciousness, feelings, self-understanding and personality types. Also the
transactions and the Cathecting process are important to remember.



The approach works because people become aware of each other types and thus the differences are
brought into the open where people can discuss them.

Strengths
o It emphasizes the relationship between the leader and the follower, a transaction between these
two persons. It results in an analysis of the relationship between them.
o The universality of this approach. Presumably are applicable across cultures.
o It emphasizes also the need for personal insight on the part of the leader and also the follower.
o It discourages manipulative techniques of leadership. Effective leadership is based on self-
understanding and empathy.
o It encourages the leader to pursue a course for personal growth and development.

Weaknesses
o This approach is based on clinical observations and treatment of persons with serious difficulties.
o The subjective nature of the findings of clinical psychologists (also the cultural biases).
Psychiatrists and their patients for the most part have been white, at least middle class, with a
Judeo-Christian background.
o Early work in psychodynamics was based on the traditional two-parent family origin. Divorce and
remarriage create a set of complex relationships.
o It does not take into account organizational factors.
o It does not lend itself to training in any conventional sense.

Leadership instrument


There are a lot of psychological tests which you can use as a tool to improve your self-knowledge.
One of the most used ones is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator based on Jungs psychological types
(Kroeger and Thuesen 1992). There are four dimensions of personality types, which are extrovert vs.
introvert, sensor vs. intuitor, feeler vs. thinker and perceiver vs judger. As a result of these
dimensions there are altogether 16 potential personality types. It can be very useful to know your own
personality type. Sharing the leaders personality type and those of the team members is assumed
to improve understanding among the participants.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, (http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm) is the most
widely used instrument for helping members of organizations gain insights into their inner selves. There
are some problems with this and other similar measures. The first is the idea of types. In the early
history of psychology, researchers and theorists spent a great deal of effort in attempting to measure
personality types. A type means that there are categories into which people can be successfully
grouped, without a great deal of overlapping between groups. In fact, virtually every psychological scale
that has been developed results in a bell-shaped curve of scores. Most scores are bunched near the
mean or the median and there are fewer and fewer scores as you go up the scale to higher scores or
down the scale to lower scores. This bell-shaped curve means that when you try to use the scores to
make up non-overlapping groups you run into trouble. A second problem with types is the assumption


that once you have placed an individual into a group, that individual has all of the characteristics you
tend to attribute to the group and none of the characteristics that apply to members of other groups.
We will see in the next lesson the problems this has created associated with the concepts of sex and
gender. We need much more research showing that applying a Myers-Briggs type to an individual and
to those he or she works with really results in their being better able to work successfully together.

Another assumption made with the Myers-Briggs test (http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-
win/JTypes1.htm) is that since the person taking the test is responding from their conscious mind, a low
score in a certain area indicates that this area is a strong dynamic in the shadow self. This essentially
means that an individual is really the opposite of what he or she thinks. Again, we need a lot more
research before we can accept this principle at face value.

Women and Leadership

o Gender refers to way in which meaning and evaluations are associated with sex by members of a
culture.
o The degree with which Males and Females are expected to behave differently, treated differently,
and are valued differently has little to do with sex (biology) and everything to do with gender
(learned beliefs)
o Learned beliefs can easily be misleading when there are only two categories in a set (female/male
or masculine/feminine). There are three cognitive distortions with bi-polar categories.
People's thinking become simplified because of the belief that everyone must fit into a
specific category.
The categories also seem to imply that everyone within a category is identical.
Many people erroneously tend to value one category as more superior than the other.
o Although many executives and managers refer to believe that organizations are objective about
merit and gender neutral, the data from research shows that most work places use gender as the
basis for many decisions (Hale, 1996).
o Ongoing research has indicated continued dilemmas for women leaders who seek to balance work
demands with personal life (Ensher, Murphy, Sullivan, 2002)
o The application of this section has three benefits
Can help organizations that have experienced difficulties in retaining women.
It can inform women of what they need to do to develop as leaders.
It can inform men of the subtle patterns enacted every day in the work place that impedes
progress.
o A study found that males did well under cooperative conditions while females did well under
competitive conditions. The female participants were more concerned with the feelings of other
participants than the males were. The females spent more time and effort to get to know the
others in their groups and perhaps felt that those interpersonal relationships were more
important than the game and its outcomes. But why, you might ask, did this make them less able
to cooperate with each other. The answer lies in the nature of the game. Winning may be more
important to males than to females, whether it is as a group over other groups or as an individual
over others in the group. In order for the group to effectively cooperate it was necessary that
uncooperative behavior be stopped quickly. When working together to solve a problem under
time pressure, males are pretty good at suspending concern for feelings and focusing on the task.
Females on the average are less willing or able to do that. There is a general belief that women are


more likely than men to adopt a participative or democratic style of leadership. Women seem to
prefer working in cooperative situations rather than competitive ones.

Overview of research trends
Researchers over the past 20 years, have focused on three main questions:
a. Can women be leaders?
i. The answer of course is, Yes. Some interesting demographics.
1. 135 Million people employed in the US. 46.6% are women (2001).
2. Women earned .76 cents for every dollar earned by men in 2001.
3. Women filled `5.7% of corporate officer including 7.1% of CFO, 16.1 of general
counsels.
4. 5.2% of top-earning corporate officers were filled by women.
5. 12.4% of seats held in Fortune 500 corporate directors.
6. 6 Female CEO for Fortune 500 companies and 11 female CEOs of Fortune 500 & 1000.
7. 44% of small businesses in US (20.4 million) are owned by women.
8. 5% of venture capitalist and 3% of government contracts are awarded to women
owned businesses.
9. 12% of state governorship. 13% in US Senate. 14% of US House of representatives.
10. In 1998, Fortune profiled 50 women leaders.
11. African American women currently represent the largest group of color in
management positions and are surpassing African American Men in
Executive/Managerial positions.
12. Women inclusion in leadership has increased over the last few decades, but does not
reflect their overall proportion of labor force.
13. Enhanced Productivity, competitive advantage, and financial performance, are three
of the reasons why developing and promoting women leaders are in the best interest
of employers. (Barney, 1997) - Capacity to optimize the use of the internal resources.
14. Underutilized women and people of color are major sources of untapped value that
can enhance organization's creativity, change efforts, team work, and financial
performance (Appold, Siengthai & Kasarda, 1998)
b. Do male and females differ in their behavior and effectiveness in organizations?
i. The purpose of this question shifted many times. Sometimes to research equality, other
times is to understand impact of gender on leadership.
ii. Recent research has used meta-analysis (set of statistical procedures that for analyzing all
studies to determine the overall trends)
iii. Meta-Analyses in the last 15 years indicate that assuming differences in behavior, cognition
could lead to erroneous conclusions. A Meta-Analyses of 160 studies concluded that there is
only one difference (Women used a more participative or democratic style and less
autocratic or directive style than men did.)
iv. Both Men and Women emphasized task accomplishment when the setting was numerically
dominated by leaders of their own sex.
v. 82 studies did not found that females and males did not differ in effectiveness. (Dobbins &
Platz, 1986; Donnell & Hall, 1980; Powel, 1993)
vi. Another meta-analysis found that female and make leaders are evaluated differently (Eagly,
Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992) which affect the impact of management training.
1. Both Female and Male leaders were evaluated equally favorably when they used a
stereotypically feminine style (democratic )


2. Only female leaders were evaluated unfavorably when they used a masculine
leadership style (Autocratic or directive)
3. Women were particularly devalued when they worked in a male dominated setting.
vii. Another study found that females and males leaders differ in:
1. The length of time they need to go to get promoted
2. The need to adapt their behavior at work
3. Amount of support they tend to receive at work
4. The impact of family variables on career development.
viii. A theory based on sex differences in social behavior (Eagly, 1987) proposes that people are
generally expected to engage in activities and actions congruent with their culturally defined
gender roles.
ix. Comparison of leader roles favored men over women when three conditions were true:
1. When the setting was male dominated (especially military)
2. When a high percentage of subordinates were male.
3. When the role was seen as more congenial to men in terms of self-assessed
competence, interest, low requirement for cooperation, high requirement for control.
x. Comparison of leader roles favored women over men when these three conditions were
reversed. In addition, women leaders were favored in middle management in business,
education, and government or social services. Men were favored in entry level or
supervisory positions especially in the military.
xi. Eagly (1992) concluded that leadership roles maybe defined in a more masculine or
feminine fashion depending on the organizational context of management. Across most
sectors of the economy other than the military, women's effectiveness increased as they
moved up the hierarchy and as cooperation rather than control was required.
xii. Three recent studies by Advanced Teamware, inc. conducted a study where 6000 people
completed a questionnaire about 915 middle-upper managers. Of the 31 areas examines,
women outperformed men in 28 including conflict resolution, work quality, adaptation to
change, productivity, idea generation, and motivation of others. Men handled pressure and
coped with frustration better than women did. Both groups scored equally on delegating
authority.
xiii. Another study by (Saville & Holdsworth in New Zealand) conducted a study of 3000
managers. They found no differences on 30 attributes analyzed. However, they found that
women emphasized planning and organizing work and an empathic approach. They placed
less emphasis on the need to win at all costs.
xiv. Generally speaking, women leaders tend to be more participative and less autocratic, more
effective in middle management, and in situations requiring cooperation.
c. Why do so few women leaders reach the top?
There are three common explanations.
1. "Women absence from executive positions is a function of not having been in managerial
positions long enough for natural career progression to occur. There is data to support this.
2. "Women lack general management or line experience" (Ragins et al, 1998). There is data to
support this explanation. However, there are other studies that shows that top executives
were not distinguished from middle management by their line experience, but by the
breadth of positions and departments they worked in. The study also found that the longer
managers served in line positions, the less likely they move into top management.
3. "Women leaders are themselves the problem. They are either less suited for executive
demands rather than men, unavailable because so few are sufficiently qualified, or lacking in


self-confidence. (Morris, 1998). This has been refuted by a large number of published
research.

Recent studies have found that womens slow progress to the top have been the focus of a "Glass
Ceiling". (Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, 1995). There are three broad categories:

1. Organizational barriers
1. Higher standards of Performance and efforts for women have been reported in many
studies (Mainiero, 1994; Morris, 1998)
2. Inhospitable corporate culture (Ragins et al, 1998). The culture,
a. Discourages balancing high career aspirations wit non work obligations
b. Communicate that women don't belong in executive positions.
c. Require that women accomplish major tasks without sufficient resources.
A study found that a males-only organizational hierarchy hindered women's
promotions into lower and middle management while having female leaders fostered
women's promotions.
3. Homophily - The tendency to prefer to work and interact with people who are similar
demographically and attitudinally. Homophily can ease the initial interactions in a
group, but can restrict creative thinking and balanced decision making (Cox, 1993).
Since women of color differ in two demographic from European American men, they
are more likely to experience marginalization at work (Bell et al, 1993).
4. Organizations have limited the challenge of assignments given to women. In a study of
507 managers, both men and women were given opportunities to start new ventures
and turn around businesses in trouble, but men were given higher levels of
responsibilities. This reduced the potential of promotions for women.
5. Another study of 2431 white collar employees, showed that both men and women
promotions to middle management were fostered by enhancing human capital
variables (education, training, and challenging work). Women's promotions were
fostered by the presence of a woman in the hierarchy and hindered by the lack of one.
Their promotions to upper management were fostered by career encouragement.
Men's promotions were unaffected by these variables.
2. Interpersonal barriers
1. Refer to the obstacles that occur primarily in the context of a working relationship.
Supportive relationships are especially important in women's leadership
advancement.
2. Gender prejudice can take many forms and usually not conscious. The most basic
preconceptions is that a good manager is inherently masculine.
3. Preconceptions that women are less competent means that women have to prove
themselves repeatedly in each new situations.
4. Women must identify ad explicitly ask for challenging assignments rather than simply
having such assignments offered to them.
5. Women perceived that a need to adapt their behavioral style so that men could avoid
feeling intimidated. (Ragin et al, 1998)
6. Male leaders were positively evaluated when they behaved either cooperatively or
autocratically. Women leaders were evaluated positively only when they behaved
cooperatively. (Eagly et al. 1992).
7. Several studies documented that women experienced lower support in their careers
than similarly employed men.


8. Informal networks are very important and yet studies shown that women leaders have
either tended to be excluded or had to work harder to be included.
9. A critical relationship is mentoring. Studies in mentoring had pointed out that there is
dramatic impact on salaries of employees and that European American men were
most likely to be the protg.
10. Women and men were likely to be mentors, but women were more likely to have
same sex protgs.
11. Bad mentoring can be worse than none at all (Ragins, Cotton, & Miller, 2000)
3. Personal
1. Women leaders themselves have reported navet and lower political savvy as a barrier.
2. To mature organizationally, black women have adopted perseverance, willingness to
change employers, and self-generated developmental opportunities.
3. The most serious challenge for women leaders are the non-work obligations that they
remain primarily responsible for in a household. Some studies found that the multiple
roles that women play in work and non-work actually enhances their leadership skills.
4. The ability to balance the "have it all" need has been a frequent theme in women
leaders. Some women have coped by purchasing domestic services, supportive or
non-employed husband, or scaling back their families.

Strengths
o Research on gender dynamics have made a roader impact on leadership. Improvements in the
work places and in society occur only when unconscious patterns and beliefs are uncovered and
recognized.
o Considering the sex of leaders and employees can yield insights within the major theoretical
traditions. There are many examples of this discussed in the various theories about situations and
acceptable/non-acceptable behaviors.
o Research in this area has contributed to the broader conversation in the US society about values
and questions like this:
Do we prefer a work place that rewards talents or demographic characteristics?
Does profit matter more than people's wellbeing?
Does work matter more than personal relationships?
Is merit consistently applied if one sex have to consistently work harder and received less
pay and recognition?

Weaknesses
o The disadvantage of focusing on the individual's sex can become the only or the primary attribute
identifying them rather than one of the many attributes.
o A serious issue in the research on sex and gender is the assumption that members of each
category are identical in race, sexual orientation, age, etc. In fact most of the respondents to the
surveys were European American Women.

Leadership instrument
The BSRI developed by Bem in 1974 has often been used to measure the self-perceptions of gender role.
Another instrument that was developed by Yost & Herbert in 1985 measures the attitudes toward
women as managers (ATWAM)


Leadership Ethics
o Very little research has been published on the theoretical foundations of leadership ethics.
o There has been many studies on leadership, but little has been related to leadership.
o One of the first leadership ethics writings appeared in 1996 by W.K. Kellogg

Ethics defined
o Development of ethics theory dates back to Plato and Aristotle.
o It is concerned with the kinds of values and morals an individual or society finds desirable.
o These are rules and principles that provide the basis for understanding what it means to be a
morally decent human being.
o The choices that leaders make and how they respond to a given circumstance are informed
and directed by their ethics.

Ethical theories
Ethical leadership theories fall into two categories
o Leader's conduct (Their actions)
i. Consequences (Theological theories) - Focus on what is right and what is wrong.
1. Ethical Egoism - An individual should act to create the greatest good for
themselves. A leaders should take a career that they would selfishly enjoy (Avolio
& Locke, 2002). This is closely related to transactional leadership theories. For
example, a middle-level manager who wants their team to be the best in the
company is acting out of ethical egoism.
2. Utilitarianism - We should act to create the greatest good for the greatest
number. Maximize the social benefits while minimizing the social costs
(Shumann, 2001). Example: when the US government allocates a large portion of
the federal budget to the health care instead of catastrophic illness, it is acting
out of the utilitarian ethics.
3. Altruism - This is the opposite of Ethical Egoism and is concerned with showing
the best interest for others even when it runs contrary to self-interest. Authentic
transformational leadership is based on altruistic behavior (Bass, Steidlmeier,
1999).
ii. Duty (Deontological Theories)
This is telling the truth, keeping promises, being fair, independent of the
consequences.
Actions should not infringe on others' rights and should not further the moral
rights of others.
Leader's character (Who they are)
Virtue-based theories -
1. These are not innate, but can be acquired.
2. They are rooted in heart of the individual and in their disposition.
3. It focuses on telling people "what to be" as opposed of "what to do"
4. Examples include courage, temperance, generosity, self-control, honesty,
sociability, modesty, fairness, and justice.
5. This theory is about being and becoming a worthy human being.

Centrality of ethics to leadership


o The influence dimension of a leader requires that they have an impact on the lives of those
they lead. To make a change in other people carries with it an enormous amount of ethical
burden and responsibility.
o Leaders have an ethical responsibility to treat followers with dignity, respect, as a human
being with unique identities.
o The "respect for people" demands that a leader be sensitive to follower's own interests,
needs, and conscientious concerns.
o Leaders play an important role in establishing the ethical climate of the their organizations.

Heifetz's Perspective on Ethical leadership
o A psychiatrist who observed world leaders.
o His approach emphasizes how leaders help followers confront conflict and effect changes
from conflict. It is about helping followers deal with conflicting values that emerge in rapidly
changing work environments and social cultures.
o His approach deals with values.
o Leaders must utilize authority to immobilize people to face tough issues.
o The leader provides the holding environment in which there is trust, nurturance, and
empathy.
o The leader's duty is to assist followers in struggling with change and personal growth.

Burns's Perspective on Ethical leadership
o Transformational leadership places a strong emphasis on followers' needs, values, and
morals.
o It involves attempts by leaders to move followers to higher standards of responsibility.
o It is the responsibility of the leader to help followers assess their own values and needs in
order to raise them to a higher level of functioning, to a level that will stress values such a
liberty, justice, and equality.

Greenleaf's Perspective on Ethical leadership
o He developed a paradoxical approach to leadership called "Servant leadership" in 1970s
o It gained increased popularity in recent years.
o It has a strong altruistic ethical overtone and emphasizes that leaders should be attentive to
concerns or their followers.
o He argued that leadership was bestowed on a person who is by nature a servant. The way an
individual becomes a leader is by first being a servant.
o A servant leader focuses on the needs of the followers and helps them become more
knowledgeable, freer, and more autonomous and more like servants themselves.
o Servant leader has a social responsibility to be concerned with the have-nots and to
recognize them as equal stakeholders in the organization.
o Greenleaf places a great deal of emphasis on listening, empathy, and unconditional
acceptance of others.
o Many of these ethical theories emphasis that the relationship between leader-follower is an
"ethical" one and its related to the "caring principle"(Gilligan, 1982).



Principles of ethical leadership
Northouse has listed five principles of ethical leadership. Actually the origins of these can be traced
back to Aristotle. These principles provide a foundation for the development of sound ethical
leadership. According to these principles ethical leaders respect others, serve others, are just, are
honest and build community. To be an ethical leader, we must be sensitive to the needs of others,
treat others in ways that are just and care for others.



1. Ethical leaders respect others
o Immanuel Kant argues that it is our duty to treat others with respect. One should treat others
as ends in itself and never as means to an end.
o Beauchamp and Bowie (1988) pointed out that "Persons must be treated as having their
autonomously established goals and must never be treated purely as the means to another
person's goals."
o Leaders who respect also allow others to be themselves. They approach others with a sense
of unconditional worth and value individual differences (Kitchener, 1984)
o Respect means giving credence to others' ideas and confirming them as human beings.
o A leader should nurture followers in becoming aware of their own needs, values, and
purposes.
o Respect means that a leader listens closely to their subordinates, is empathetic, and tolerant
to opposing views.
o When a leader exhibits respect, subordinates feel competent about their work.
2. Ethical leaders serve others
o This is based on the concern for others (Ethical egoism)
o This is an example of altruism.
o An example of this is observed in mentoring, empowerment, behaviors, and team building.
o Very similar concept to the "Beneficence" that is taught to health professionals.


o Senge contended that one of the important tasks of leaders in learning organizations is to be
a steward (servant) of the vision within the organization and highlights the importance of not
being self-centered, but integrating one's self or vision with the vision of the organization.
3. Ethical leaders are Just
o Justice demands that leaders place the issue of just at the center of their decision making.
o No one should be treated differently unless their particular situation demands it and if that is
the case, then the rules for differential treatment should be made clear.
o Good coaches are those who never have favorites and those who make a point of playing
everyone in the team.
o The golden rule (Rawls, 1971) is to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
o The principles of distributive justice includes:
i. To each person, and equal share.
ii. According to individual needs
iii. According to that person's rights
iv. According to individual efforts
v. According to societal contribution
vi. According to merit.
4. Ethical leaders are honest
o Being honest is not just about telling the truth. It has to do with being open with others,
representing reality as fully and a completely as possible.
o There are times of course where telling the complete truth can be destructive and
counterproductive. The challenge is to strike a balance.
o It is important for leaders to be authentic, but sensitive to the attitudes and feelings of
others.
o Dala Costa (1998) made a point in the Ethical Imperative book. "Do not promise what you
can't deliver, do not misrepresent, do not hide behind spin-doctored evasions, do not
suppress obligations, do not evade accountability, do not accept the 'survival of the fittest'
pressures"
5. Ethical leaders build community
o Leadership is often defined as the "process of influencing others to reach a common or
communal goal." This definition has a clear ethical dimension. The common goal implies that
leaders and followers agree on the directions of the group.
o Authentic transformation means that a leader cannot impose their will on other. They need
to search for goals that are compatible with everyone.
o Ethical leadership demands attention to civic virtue (Rost, 1991). This means that both
leaders and followers need to attend to community goals and not just their mutually
determined goals.

Maybe the most important thing is to realize that leadership involves values; one cannot be a
leader without being aware of and concerned about ones own values. We can say also that rather
than telling people what to do, we should tell them what to be and help them to become more
virtuous.

When practiced over time good values become habitual and a part of the persons themselves.

Strengths


o It provides some direction in how to think about ethical leadership and how to practice it.
o It reminds us that leadership is a moral process. Other than the transformational theory of
Burns, no other theory considered or highlighted ethics.
o It describes some basic principles that we can use in developing real-world ethical leadership.
These ethics have bee present for over 2000 years.

Weaknesses
o It is still in an early stage of development. It lacks a strong body of traditional research.
o This area of research relies on the writing of a few individuals, whose work has been
primarily descriptive and anecdotal.

Leadership instrument
Craig and Gustafson (1998) developed the Perceived Leader Integrity Scale (PLIS). It is based on the
Utilitarian ethical theory. It evaluates leaders' ethics by measuring the degree to which
subordinates see them as acting in ways that produce the greatest good for the greatest number of
people.